Is knowledge "facts"? Is it "truth"? Is it "wisdom"?

Let us agree that there is one big thing: which we call 'reality'. (By the way, this is sometimes called 'doing philosophy'.) We all believe that there is one knowable, 'objective' (outside of and independent of ourselves) universe that we perceive subjectively (from within ourselves, through our senses).

In other words, there is one real world, we all live in it; it is the same for all of us, even though each of us interacts with it in their own way. We each develop our own perceptions and our own belief systems. Each of us views the same world through our own unique 'spectacles', as Immanuel Kant would say.

Truth

What is truth? When we discussed 'proof', we defined 'authorities' (sources of facts or 'truth'). One authority that we all recognize today is science. Scientific truth derives (comes from) the scientific method: experimentation and documentation of results.

Many of you are familiar with the term 'hypothesis". The common definition of this word is 'an educated guess". The scientific method begins with a working hypothesis, an idea about 'the truth'. This could be truth about how something works, or what will happen if you do something, such as, apply pressure or temperature to some materials in some environment. The recipe for a cake is an hypothesis. You believe (or at least, you hope) that the cake will taste great after baking!

The word 'hypothesis' contains the smaller word 'thesis". This is usually defined as an idea. An 'antithesis' is the opposite of a thesis, the opposite idea. For example, some people think of love as the thesis and hate as the antithesis (opposite). They are said to be 'antithetical'.

'Synthesis' is the joining of two things, two ideas. A German philosopher, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), envisioned change as occurring according to a pattern of thesis, antithesis, synthesis. That is, something exists (a thesis) and there arises a problem or a challenge (an antithesis). The solution (synthesis) is reached and put into place. The synthesis is now the thesis. Then, inevitably, a new problem arises and the process begins anew.

The scientist's hypothesis is an educated guess (a prediction of what will happen). After formulating the hypothesis, the scientist 'tests' the accuracy (truthfulness) through a process called 'experimentation'. Experiments are designed and conducted to test the hypothesis (to see how valid, or true, it is.) For example, baking a cake is an experiment: each time it comes out slightly differently.

The results of the experiments determine the validity (truthfulness) of the hypothesis, which can then become a guide for further action and experimentation.  For example, suppose that when you baked your cake the last time, you didn't pre-heat the oven and the cake took longer to bake and did not taste as good as usual. You wouldn't do that again!

Let us use an historical example to illustrate experimentation. In the 16th century, when Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) lived, people commonly believed that heavy objects fell faster than light objects. Galileo questioned this, thinking that, perhaps, all objects fell through the air at the same rate of speed. To test his hypothesis, it is said, he climbed to the top of the leaning tower of Pisa (in Italy) and dropped two balls of different weight. The result was that both the heavier and the lighter weight balls reached the ground at the same time, thus proving his hypothesis that the weight of the object did not affect its rate of descent (fall).

When Galileo 'proved' this, he changed what he believed to be true. He changed the scientific understanding of how falling bodies behave. He changed 'scientific' truth.

Scientific truth always seeks to explain all of the available facts in the simplest way.

That is why scientific truth can change. As human beings learn more facts, we have to find explanations that include them all, and then we have to keep simplifying those explanations. In science, this is often done by examining one's assumptions, the things one believes without question. You can try this in your private life: remember what Socrates thought about questions, they are a path to the truth.

There is also a concept called 'relative truth'. This is when the validity (correctness, rightness, acceptability) of something is judged within a real context, rather than not with regard to an absolute rule, standard, or law. In Socrates' case, for example, one could judge, within the context of Athenian laws, that he was guilty as charged, for what he did was, indeed (truly) against the laws of ancient Athens. It was not 'true' for Athens that one could question the existence of the gods. Therefore, under those laws, by questioning absolute authorities (such as the belief in many gods), he was not teaching the 'truth' to his students.

On the other hand, one could judge that Socrates was truthful by questioning the existence of the gods. One could argue that, despite the fact that it was illegal in ancient Athens, there is a higher truth, an absolute truth, which cannot be hurt by questioning, doubting and investigating. It is this judgment that Plato (and western culture generally) accepts. Consequently, Socrates is often called the first 'martyr' (an individual who sacrifices his or her life for a cause) in the search for truth

Copyright: 2004 English 4 All, Inc.