Pages

Facts and Knowledge

Many things are directly mentioned as existing, and a spontaneous conviction is expressed regarding 'facts' and 'knowledge' in the self-communing quoted in the previous article, Statement of the Problem.

 

He 'watches the world go by.' so he is sure that there is a real world of substance, an existing universe of tremendous magnitude, consisting of earth and sun and stars. He may have no conception of the exact dimensions of this universe, or of the distance and volume and nature of the stars; but he is sure that they are really there and that he does not merely imagine them.

 

He speaks of space and space-relations: for people are walking 'along the street,' there is a 'square opposite,' the sun is 'sinking in the west'; he notices a 'here' and 'there,' an 'outside' and 'inside.'

 

The person also mentions time and time-relations: 'yesterday,' 'tonight,' 'tomorrow,' 'soon'; and the elements of succession in time are designated by the phrase 'every minute.'

 

Mathematical quantities are affirmed: 'square,' 'larger,' 'flatter.' And also numerical quantities appear: 'people,' 'stars,' 'tree.' He notices the relation of part to whole in the 'branch' that is broken off the 'tree.'

 

There are qualities, like 'blue,' 'strong,' 'cold'; actions like 'walking,' 'sinking,' 'broke off'; reactions like 'caught a cold,' the branch 'broken' by the wind; posture like 'sitting in comfort'; habitus like 'being clothed with a topcoat.'

 

Facts of sense-experience are enumerated: he 'sees' the things about him on the earth and in the sky; he 'hears' people chatting; he 'tastes' his pipe; he 'feels' sick; he is 'conscious' of his body. And so, too, facts of intellectual experience are noted: consciousness of the Ego or 'self,' 'thoughts,' 'knowledge,' 'soul'; states of mind like 'belief,' 'errors'; states of will like 'I must,' 'I ought not.'

 

He is aware of the great distinction between his self and things-other-than-his-self; between mind and matter; between living and inanimate things; between the subjective and objective; between the ideal and the real; between substantial and accidental being; between appearance and reality; between knowledge and opinion; between truth and error; between certainty and probability.

 

And many other things are contained in the data of his musings by implication. He is convinced that his senses, by and large, give him a true picture of the world about him and that he can trust them in their function of bringing the world into contact with his mind by means of the sense-organs of his body. He is also convinced that his intellect, through judgment and thought, can acquire a knowledge of the world and of himself which is true and valid and certain. He realizes that his mind can make 'errors' and that appearances may deceive (as when the sun 'appears' flatter, bigger, and redder, and when the sky 'seems' to turn into fire and gold); but he also realizes that his mind can detect errors and correct deceiving impressions, finally arriving at truth. Furthermore, he knows that truth is objective, that his mind does not fabricate truth but merely discovers it, and that his mind will posses truth only when it agrees in its judgments with the things as they are in themselves.

No comments:

Post a Comment

 

Most Reading

Sidebar One

The validity or truth-value of human knowledge is the crucial problem in modern Philosophy. It has agitated the minds of philosophers for more than three centuries and the effects of their discussions are felt in every department of science. Naturally so, since it lies in the very nature of Epistemology to question the capability of man's mind to contact reality and to know what things are in themselves, the validity of all knowledge, and consequently also of science, is at stake. The foundations of human knowledge are challenged, examined, and frequently attacked. An acquaintance with this problem and its possible solution will be, therefore, a matter of prime importance for every seeker of truth and for every student of Philosophy.

 

This blog is intended for those who have no previous acquaintance with the subject. In accordance with this purpose, we have endeavored to place the problem in its proper historical setting, showing its origin and development, without confusing the issue with a large amount of historical detail. For the same reason, the subject (Epistemology) is treated in a constructive manner, seeking a positive solution of the Epistemological problem rather than giving an extensive criticism and refutation of the individual opposing systems of thought.

 

The language, so far as consistent with the matter under discussion, is plain and simple, avoiding what Hugh S. Elliot styles "sesquipedalian verbiage." Much of our modern philosophical jargon is so well-nigh incomprehensible as to make the underlying ideas opaque unintelligibility is not necessarily depth. Obscurities, of course, remain because the nature of knowledge itself is obscure; no amount of words will ever be able to clarify completely the mystery of the mind.