In today's intellectual landscape, we're often torn between two extremes: the notion that our claims to knowledge are futile from the start, and the conviction that they're absolute truths. Educational institutions frequently perpetuate this dichotomy, leaving us wondering whether our pursuit of knowledge is built on shaky ground. At the heart of this dilemma lies a fundamental question: are our claims to knowledge justified, and if so, how? Do they stem from a purely social construct, devoid of objective basis, or can we confidently assert certain truths? Moreover, how do our hasty judgments influence these claims? The tone of public debates can be misleading, implying that either we're incapable of knowing anything or that current knowledge is sacrosanct. "What Can We Really Know? The Strengths and Limits of Human Understanding" seeks to strike a balance, arguing that while many of our claims are justified, a significant portion of what we consider knowledge is socially constructed and thus subject to revision. By examining how knowledge is understood, the reach and limitations of science, and recent arguments for God's existence, this work advocates for a healthy dose of humility in our public and private discussions.