A dissertation on the aspects of subjectivity.

Home | Community | Message Board

You are not signed in.
New Account

Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post

Pages: 1 | 2 | Next > [ show all ]

Anonymous

A dissertation on the aspects of subjectivity.

#808542 - 08/10/02 07:54 AM (24 years, 2 months ago)

In order to converse intelligently on this subject it is necessary to come to consensus on what philosophy is. Perhaps it would be best to examine the idea that 'philosophy is subjective'. The ideas inside a person's head are subjective; that is to say they belong to that person alone. Yet, when two people agree on a perceived object or event we say that the knowledge of the object or event is 'objective' or 'shared' knowledge. To further our understanding on this let me introduce the terms 'public' and 'private' where public stands for things that are common knowledge between two people and 'private' stands for that which is known by one person alone. Now we can ask the question, "Is philosophy a public enterprise?". In other words can we ask questions about reality that are not scientific but are philosophic knowledge between two persons? Yes, we can.

In order for the philosophic enterprise to stand apart from other types of knowledge we have to ask what constitutes philosophic knowledge. Philosophy as an autonomous branch of knowledge has five conditions that must be met in order for it to be distinguished from other types of knowledge and be useful for the expansion of our knowledge of reality. They are:

1. It must be a type of knowledge.

2. It must be a type of knowledge that can be refined with respect to truth. In other words it must be corrigible.

3. It must be a type of knowledge that can be discussed as a public enterprise.

4. It must be a type of knowledge that has relative autonomy from all other branches of knowledge.

5. It must be a type of knowledge that gives answers to questions about that which is and happens in the world and secondarily questions about how we know, think, or speak about that which is and happens or about what men do and seek.

Any branch of knowledge is has a public character if:

1. The participants are willing and able to answer the same questions.

2. The questions can be approached bit by bit; not being forced to answer all the questions in order to answer just one of them.

3. It is possible to disagree as well as agree about the answers.

4. Disagreements among the participants are adjudicable by reference to standards commonly accepted by participants in the enterprise, and;

5. Cooperation is possible among the participants; if it is possible for a number of them working on the same question to make partial contributions which are cumulative and which add up to a better solution than any one participant proposes.

Some of the questions that are within philosophy's domain are:

What is the nature of being and existence? What are the properties of that which exists? What are the modes of being and types of existence? What constitutes change? What is causation? What are the powers of the human mind? What is the nature and extent of human knowledge? What is material and immaterial? What is the nature of God?

Notice that some of the questions appear to belong to the realm of science. Some of that may be due to misunderstanding the nature of philosophy. Or it may be due to the fact that we are more accustomed to thinking within the purview of science. Or even because some of the questions have a 'scientific' answer as well.

For example, consider the nature of the universe with respect to determinacy/indeterminacy. Science within its restricted paradigm might tell us that the universe is determinate. In other words everything that is ever done or said or happens is predetermined by the state of matter that has bearing on those events (chaos theory excepted). Philosophy has much to say on such matters because philosophy is able to make observations about reality just as science is able to make observations about reality. General observations, the kind philosophy makes, are just as valid as the kind of specific observations that science makes when it investigates things that are specifically inside its purview.

Remember this: Every time science gives us an answer it is speaking from within its restricted philosophic paradigm. Which is fine until the question has answers that reside in both domains. At that point each discipline has a bearing on the other and neither can give a sufficient answer without the aid of the other.

Also philosophy has a decided advantage over science in that it is able to define itself. I hope this is not too overly broad but whenever the question is asked, "What is the nature of..." the answer comes from philosophy, not science. Whenever science attempts to define itself is it doing philosophical thinking. That is why some scientists do such a poor job at it. It's not their field.

Cheers,

Edited by Mr_Mushrooms (08/11/02 04:48 PM)

Extras:

Similar Threads	Poster	Views	Replies	Last post
Subjective v. Objective Reality ( 1 2 all )	Joshua	4,460	24	01/31/03 07:31 PM by Joshua
Subjectiveness	ska8ball	1,405	8	04/03/03 03:07 PM by shaggy101
Are morals subjective? ( 1 2 all )	Anonymous	6,358	35	04/24/03 05:58 AM by MarkostheGnostic
Objective reality challange	gribochek	1,930	8	01/31/02 09:20 PM by Swank
Reality is subjective ( 1 2 all )	Huehuecoyotl	2,611	34	07/21/04 06:54 PM by tak
Determinism & Objective/Subjective Morality	TinTree	2,914	13	01/24/05 10:34 AM by shroomydan
A debate on the subject of the morality of drug use.	neuro	1,944	7	02/21/03 05:10 AM by Sclorch
objective and subjective states of mind	Grav	2,401	5	03/18/03 11:21 AM by Cherk