Archive for the ‘Postmodernism’ Category:
How Ironic
This Red vs Blue clip emphasizes how sometimes we use words that carry different meanings to different people. When we discuss heavy topics, we are often doing so with some very loaded terms. What are some terms that you have frequently seen misunderstood?
Practical Epistemology
I know what you’re thinking.
“How can a post on epistemology be practical?” After all, isn’t philosophy only useful in ivory towers? I think this has been a major flaw in philosophical thought for many people. Philosophy has no value if it is not lived out; if it does not affect the way we live our lives. And let’s face it, a lot of us like to make statements in papers, in posts, or commenting on blogs that just aren’t livable.
A philosophy must be lived out. If I argue that no knowledge is possible, I need to live that idea out (otherwise I am a hypocrite). If I believe there is a God who made the world, but that God has stepped back and is no longer involved, I need to live that out. If I believe there is a God who is involved in the world, I should probably figure out how he is involved and act upon that.
Mistakes in Knowing
In Brad’s last post you learned of my apparent run in with the mob (thanks Brad), but I would like to ask upon what epistemology can we even know that (just kidding)? That got me thinking, what if someone really believed the mafia had kidnapped me on the basis of Brad’s post? And how does that apply to epistemology? Mistakes in sense perception and reason happen all the time.
In Men in Black, Will Smith learns, totally contrary to what Will Smith believed, that man is not alone in the universe. Tommy Lee Jones challenges Will Smith saying, “a thousand years ago everybody knew as a fact, that the earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on it. Imagine what you’ll know tomorrow.” So why do mistakes happen in our knowledge? Read more »
Magic Eye
Disclaimer: this post is an explanation of Ether Meek’s thesis in her book Longing to Know. Most of the examples are taken from this book as well.
I have dealt with knowing in my two earlier posts about the need for certainty and the three epistemic options. Meek offers this new definition: “Knowing is the responsible human struggle to rely on clues, to focus on a coherent pattern, and submit to its reality.”
Meek argues that knowing is a three step process. First, we look at clues. Then we struggle to looks through the clues, and finally we integrate the clues. Confusing? Let’s look at an example. Think of those “magic eyes.” One is shown above. You are supposed to look at this 2D image and somehow you are able to see something in 3D. Knowing is like coming to see this 3D image. We are given a list of clues to how to see this image (http://www.magiceye.com/faq_example.htm). Then we try to do it ourselves. For the longest time I couldn’t get the stupid thing Read more »
Posts
