True knowledge in philosophy

2024 Author: Henry Conors | [email protected]. Last modified: 2024-02-12 02:43

The truth of any knowledge and object can be proven or questioned. The Kantian antinomy, which says that even two opposite hypotheses can be logically substantiated, puts true knowledge in the rank of a mythical animal.

Such a beast may not exist at all, and Karamazov's "nothing is true, everything is permitted" should become the highest postulate of human life. But first things first.

Philosophical relativism, and later - solipsism pointed out to the world that true knowledge is not always such. The problem of what in philosophy can be considered genuine and what can be considered false has been raised for a very long time. The most famous ancient example of the struggle for the truth of judgments is the dispute between Socrates and the sophists and the well-known saying of the philosopher: "I know that I know nothing." Sophists, by the way, were among the first to question almost everything.

The times of theology pacified the ardor of philosophers a little, giving "onlytrue" and righteous view of life and the creation of the world by God. But Giordano Bruno and Nicholas of Cusa, thanks to their scientific discoveries, empirically proved that the Sun does not revolve around the Earth, and the planet itself is not the center of the universe. A discovery by 15th-century philosophers and scientists has rekindled the debate about what true knowledge means, as the planet appears to be hurtling through unexplored and frightening outer space.

At that time, new philosophical schools begin to appear and science develops.

So, true knowledge is, according to Aristotle, which is fully consistent with reality. This approach is easy enough to criticize because it leaves out both deliberate delusion and insanity. R. Descartes, on the other hand, believed that true knowledge differs from false in that it has clarity. Another philosopher D. Berkeley believed that truth is what the majority agrees with. But be that as it may, the most important criterion of truth is its objectivity, that is, independence from a person and his consciousness.

It cannot be said that humanity, by complicating technology, has come so close to denying all delusion that true knowledge is already at arm's length.

Modern technologies, computers and the Internet have fallen into the hands of uneducated and unprepared societies, which has led to information intoxication and gluttony. In our time, information oozes from all cracks, and curb this flowcan only real Moses from programming and social sciences. This picture was described quite vividly already 50 years ago, namely in the book "1984", written by J. Orwell, and in the novel "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley.

True knowledge can be worldly, scientific or artistic, as well as moral. In general, there are as many truths as there are in the world of professions. For example, the problem of famine in Africa for a scientist is a problem that requires a systematic approach, and for a believer it is a punishment for sins. That is why there are so many unceasing disputes around many phenomena, and, unfortunately, high-speed technologies, science and globalization have not yet been able to bring humanity to even the simplest moral issues.