Reading Comprehension Epistemology - Assignment Example

Reading Comprehension a Describe how truth is to be determined for the following types of claims: SEMANTIC, SYSTEMIC, LOGICAL The idea of truth varies from the different forms of knowledge presented in different ways. Truth can be determined through semantics since semantics make up the meanings contained within the terms of languages, or the propositions articulated through expressions. The logical form of knowledge can determine truth by finding the validity and coherent connection and relations between statements. The systemic form of knowledge can determine what is true through the means of following consistent rules and operations that can put a valid relationship between symbols and statements, either through scientific or mathematical methods. Empirical form of knowledge can determine truth based on the actual experience of an individual through events or things that happen around the environment. b.) EMPIRICAL claims there are the four different theories concerning the determination of the truth of empirical claims: Correspondence theory of truth Coherence theory Pragmatist theory Scientific Theory Describe each of these four theories for proving empirical claims to be true. Explain each one. Do not simply list them. Describe them and explain them. This will take more than one sentence for each one. Correspondence theory is an empirical theory of truth that was espoused by Aristotle that holds that truth is what propositions are consequent to a way things in the world are. In other words, this theory claims that a proposition is true as long as there are present and existing facts that correspond to it. Coherence theory accounts for a proposition’s truth that occurs from an association between that proposition and another proposition. In that way, coherence theory will assert that a proposition is true if it fits together and coheres with any other related proposition. Pragmatic theory holds that a proposition is true if it is practical to accept as true. This concept of truth was formed by the American Pragmatic philosophers such as C.S Peirce, William James and John Dewey who believed that the mark of truth is based on its practical utility above anything else. Beliefs that result to the best outcomes, are justified best from actions, that advance practical achievement, are held as truths. Scientific truth hold that knowledge can only be sought ascertained through various scientific methods or operations that can lessen the chances of uncertainty since it is generally held by scientists that truth at best can is only approximate and never absolute. For the scientific theory, the method on reaching a close-to-certain result is just as important as the outcome itself. For if a method is based on opinion alone, it would be considered nothing more than just subjective bias. 2.) Critical Thinking c.) What do you think of the theory that there can be simultaneous multiple truths concerning claims? Concerning all types of claims? Does it apply to claims that are semantic, systemic, logical or empirical? Comment on each type. Can there be multiple truths for each type of claim? For any type of claim? Please indicate your familiarity with the readings in your answer -this means use some quotations to support your answers. Subjectivism and Relativism would claim that there are various points of views regarding a certain truth. The reason due to this is because there are different situations and circumstances that happen that are sometimes overlooked, whether intentionally or unintentionally, by the objective forms of knowledge. This could also apply to semantic, systemic, logical and empirical forms of knowledge. Semantic knowledge is knowledge that is the result of learning the meaning of words which the knowledge of words is knowledge of definitions, and such definitions are set in dictionaries (Pecorino, “An Introduction to Philosophy”). It should be taken into consideration that there are various languages around the world, and each language has their own rules or way of inferring something. For example, some languages make no gender distinctions in their statements while other languages place gender marks in their sentences. Semantics then could have multiple perspectives with just the various languages alone. Logical truths depend on the coherence of statements in relations with another statement. There are the rules of logic that permit claims to knowledge that are further statements of ideas consistent with the rules and the ideas already accepted (Pecorino). The problem with logical statements is that even if they may be coherent, it does not necessarily mean it would make sense. For the sake of argument, let it be said that the first statement claims that “all red fruits are sweet”, then the second statement says that “a tomato is a fruit”, which means that “tomatoes are sweet”. This may be logically true, but in reality tomatoes are not naturally sweet at all. This means logic could be taken from a different perspective as well. There also is knowledge that comes through our senses and this knowledge is empirical knowledge (Pecorino). Although, if a person has the misfortune to lacks the use of a certain physical senses or in the mildest case lacks the actual evidence or experience of a belief, multiple perspectives would be the result. On the other hand, multiple truths cannot really apply to systemic forms of knowledge. Since the systemic form of knowledge relies on mathematical and geometric rules, multiple truths cannot apply to something that has no questionable nature. One cannot think that 1 is 2, or that 6 is 9, since it is absolute that 1 is 1 and that 2 is 2 without a doubt. d.) What one person believes may not agree with another person’s belief and so what may be believed to be true to one person may not be believed to be true to the second person. Does this mean that they are both correct? Please indicate your familiarity with the readings in your answer -this means use some quotations to support your answers. The differences of belief between two persons would either lead for one to be true while the other is at the wrong, or at times both being correct since they view the same thing differently. The two theories of truth that can be considered here would be Empiricism and Pragmatism. It could be said that Empiricism can be applied in confirming who between the two persons is correct based on the presentation of any physical or sensible evidence they could present. Regardless of the differences, whatever is physically real can always be led to the mind to believe as true. It must be true and one must claim to know it and something be true not by accident or coincidence but because there is evidence to support and enough to warrant or justify the claim to know (Pecorino, “An Introduction to Philosophy”). Although, it can also be the case that both persons can be correct about a belief based on what perspective they may be looking at. Pragmatism holds that a belief is correct based on how useful it can be for an individual and what practical results it can bring. For pragmatists, there is no objective truth at all since all claims need only satisfy the group’s expectations for verification.  Science is just one of many groups with its own rules and criteria as much as there are multiple groups with different criteria there can be multiple truths (Pecorino). This means that belief is what motivates an individual and leads them to find objective ways to support their claim of belief, which sometimes mean that two people could view the same subject in a different way. e.) Do you think that each group and each person is entitled to their own truth? Does this apply to all claims? Explain what this might mean. Explain and defend your position on this question with reasons. Please indicate your familiarity with the readings in your answer. If you think that there can be more than one truth about the same claim at the same time then be sure to explain how there can be more than one truth about the shape of the earth and who is president of the USA and the sum of 2 and 7 and the number of angles in a triangle AT THE SAME TIME. Please indicate your familiarity with the readings in your answer -this means use some quotations to support your answers. Each individual is entitled to his or her own truth and this applies to all claims. This would obviously result to various points of views for a certain subject, but this also serves an advantage. Placing various opinions against each other is like pitting warriors against each other in which only the truth that is best equipped with the means and methods that make such truth closer to certainty is the likely winner among other truths. The point to this is that if objectivity is rejected, every group’s claims would be equal, which would mean that the claims of the many divergent ideologies would be true at the same time: racism, sexism, Nazism, etc (Pecorino, “An Introduction to Philosophy”), therefore becoming a pile of messy contradictions. f.) What is to be done when there is a conflict between two different "truths" concerning claims that are semantic, systemic, logical or empirical? Does the outcome of the conflict determine what the truth is? Please indicate your familiarity with the readings in your answer -this means use some quotations to support your answers. If a conflict between two different truths will occur and such issue concerns the claims between semantic, systemic, logical or empirical, the outcome is totally dependent on which truth is valid in terms of its coherence of its methods and its practical purpose to reality. Semantic knowledge may not agree with what is systemic or even logical and empirical. Most of the time, if two groups have different sets of criteria then the group with the most power will determine what truth is and impose it upon the others who will go on thinking that their own ideas are still true (Pecorino). What is to be counted is which among the different truths is the most sensible one based on how things actually are and occur. If a truth that presents itself actually corresponds to how the way things happen in reality, then that truth will be the justified one at the outcome. For this to happen, the different truths will have to be tried and tested through rules and methods of measurements that determine their validity and coherence. Also to be considered is that these truths will have to be observed based on actual experience. The truth that passes all these trials is the best outcome among other claims in such conflict. g.) What does determine whether or not an empirical claim is true or not true? Please indicate your familiarity with the readings in your answer -this means use some quotations to support your answers. Which theory do you hold to use to resolve conflicts in truth for empirical claims? The only way to find whether an empirical claim is true or not true is to use methods that would make a warranted belief a justified and true knowledge. For empirical claims, evidence is needed so that a claim can have its justification cleared away from beliefs which are just merely accidental claims, and those beliefs and claims which are unwarranted. Belief does not imply knowledge and wherever people claim to know that something is true they believe that it is so, but when people claim to believe that something is so they do not always claim to know that it is so (Pecorino, “An Introduction to Philosophy). To achieve this certainty of knowledge, empirical claims would usually rely on scientific methods and theories to observe, analyze and measure each claim. Work Cited Pecorino, Philip, A. ”An Introduction to Philosophy.” Chapter 5: Epistemology. Qcc.Cuny.Edu, 2000. Web. 24 Oct. 2011.  Read More