I've tried to choose one or a combination of theories from the terms we discussed in class to stand behind, but I can see sides and truths to each one. Even further, I feel like my views will change as I grow and learn. So I figured I would try and come up with my own theory or loose definition of reality. After research, recounting experiences, debating logic, and exploring old journal entries of mine, I came up with a theory I'll call "Samism."From relativism, I strongly believe that moral values, ethics, and ideas of right and wrong are greatly influenced by environment and culture. Of course, not every person in a specific culture has exactly the same values instilled in them from childhood. This is where some parts of Radical Constructivism and Subjectivism come in. Decisions must be shaped by and individual's past experiences. This is why making a decision about something for the first time can often be scary. If we don't experience a situation, we don't have knowledge about it. Yes, we might have factual information from textbooks and the words of others, but until we go through it ourselves, I don't think we can ever know how we should or would react and/or think about the morality behind and nature of a situation. Being in a situation and thinking about a situation are very different from each other.
I believe in "tabula rasa", a theory that human beings are born with a "blank slate" and through a combination of experience (radical constructivism) and sensory perceptions (subjectivism), we acquire knowledge and form our own truths. The only way there can be a single truth is if that truth is that there is no singular truth. I don't believe that analyzing things such as truth and reality are a waste of time. I do, however, believe that the universe and its ways are beyond our perception and full comprehension (realism). Again, using philosophy as a means of further understanding ourselves and HOW we fit with the universe is fine with me, as long as we realize that we'll never understand everything...and I think not understanding everything and still being able to go with it and grow is what makes us human.
2 comments:
I agree with the not knowing everything condition particularly. To quote Carl Sagan, "I think if we ever reach the point where we think we thoroughly understand who we are and where we came from, we will have failed. I think this search does not lead to a complacent satisfaction that we know the answer, not an arrogant sense that the answer is before us and we need only to do one more experiment to find out. It goes with a courageous intent to greet the universe as it really is, not to foist our emotional predispositions on it but to courageously accept what our explorations tell us."
However, I am suspicious of the tabula rasa theory. Do you think that nothing is determined by genetics? Some possibilities include the need to stay alive, invested in subconscious systems like breathing, eating; as well as the need to reproduce, imbued in sexual maturation and attraction. These things certainly have great effect on one's personality, ability to perceive, and how they will go about ascertaining knowledge--and there are many more things, such as inherited traits from parents (in terms of personality) that work toward a mind being disposed, as least in some small way, in one direction or another regardless of where they were born or how they grew up.
Still, I completely agree society has an enormous effect on that psyche thereafter, but perhaps I personally believe it a stretch to say each mind is constructed by reality alone.
As far as tabula rasa is concerned, I am still a firm believer but not radically. I definitely agree that genetics play a significant role in determining and shaping one's identity. I did not mean to say that we acquire our identities solely from an external reality constructed consciously by ourselves and those around us. All the features and traits you listed are agreeably concrete or at least well-rooted and not easily altered at birth. A "blank slate", in my opinion at least, would refer to HOW we react to what we're given (whether it is genetic,situational, cultural/societal ...). It's more a concept of free will than creation. If we want to repress some uncontrollable inner desire, impulse, or aspect of our personality (which I believe exists although I'm not sure where it stems from), we will. That's not to say that this repression won't make itself obvious in time, but I believe the only thing we can control is our outlook and reactions and even then, as we both agree, we'll never know for sure whether it's "right or wrong", but we WILL know what we believe it to be based on our experiences.
Post a Comment