Week 4: Pragmatism

Pragmatism and Feminist Epistemology both challenge the view of knowledge as a detached, intellectual activity. Do you think they are right? How do you think we should think about knowledge? Now that we have concluded the section on epistemology, write about what kind of thing you think knowledge is.

        I would first like to begin with Pragmatism and how the ideas it conceals assert itself to our everyday lives without any conscious thought. I would have to agree with the Pragmatic view of knowledge that our beliefs lead to actions because we all have beliefs, and it’s our beliefs that drive us to wake up and get on with our day. Pragmatics argues on the fact that if we are unable to prove these beliefs wrong then these beliefs are true. Which in fact are correct if you think logically. They also find that a belief (weather it is false or true) will lead to action, which could lead to a higher truth, and so forth. Since all 3 of the famous Pragmatics were scientists are some point, they have derived their theory of Pragmatism from the scientific method. You would first construct yourself a hypothesis (the belief) and then find an experiment to prove it right (the action), and in doing so you would be able to know whether your truth proves to be true or if there’s another truth to counter your belief making the countered belief the truth. Very confusing stuff to understand but I must say it is amazing as to how the Pragmatic thought of philosophy comes to be true for me. These instruments of our beliefs drive us to work all sorts of ways, meaning we may belief we have cancer and well live our lives to the fullest. What I find fascinating, and what really lured me into the Pragmatic view of philosophy is the idea that we view knowledge individually. We find that due to our experience, our knowledge would appear different than another person’s. I have used this example before in my previous blog, at the restaurant a person trying out a dish exaggerates how wonder it taste and sends compliments to the chef while the fellow beside her tries the same dish and finds it horrible enough to ask for a refund. The knowledge these two people acquired are both true however, the twist that knowledge is gained individually forces me to ask this question… How will we know when we have acquired full knowledge? I don’t suppose we really can.

       Feminist philosophy on the other hand seems a bit interesting and little by little generated the idea of evolution in me. Now agreeing with Pragmatism, every individual has their own knowledge and experience will prove their beliefs right or wrong. (By the way, Aristotle’s view on women made me laugh my pants on, when he mentions that females are the deficiency of males. WOW!! Really? So it really means that were all basically mating with our own sex). Feminism is something to really think about because it’s not implying that women itself are not as smart as men are, but to me it just indicates that men were able to find such philosophies about intellect, reason, logic and life first or get to it sooner than women. What would our thought be today if women took the first grab at philosophies? I believe it’s the theory behind it that women was always more concerned with discrimination, rape and were more affiliated with being a wife and taking care of the children that men was able to dominate. Feminist strive to be equal with men – to be recognized that they also have the capacity of intelligence and that they can also contribute to education and the world as we know it. I know for a fact that women alike men have great intellectual capacities, and sometimes I even think they are smarter but because of the emergence of the philosophical dudes, women now have to remain outsiders. If I was to comment to the Feminists, I would like to share that I believe females and males are in equality but should be looked at as two different species. The male species evolved faster and at a hastier pace than the women species, the one thing keeping them closely related is the fact that the two very different species are very similar and evolution has pushed the male species up the latter when the women were left as outsiders. Now when one would combine these species, ‘he’ would refer to women as he.

       I find that the views illustrated by Pragmatism to be more real than many of the other discussed in this chapter. Descrates ideas didn’t make much sense to me and Hume made much sense to an extent. The Pragmatism view completes my puzzle of epistemology and - knowledge is what you already believe in until proven wrong.