Epistemological Optimism

The problem of knowing ‘the truth’ is a fundamental theme in philosophy, which inevitably attracts any thought that dares to move beyond earthly interests. This question is so inherent to the essence of philosophy, that the very birth of a philosophical discussion will ultimately touch upon the pursuit of truth in its most noble sense, and the absence of such pursuit would mark the death of philosophy. With the dawn of Western philosophy in ancient Greece, there arose two controversial approaches to understanding the nature of knowledge and truth: realism and constructivism. Both models have variations and can be combined in different proportions (each man calls his individual ratio of realism to constructivism – his “point of view”), but their extreme formulations are mutually exclusive and exhaustive.

 

Supporters of realism understand the outside world to exist completely independently of our views or beliefs about it. Therefore, knowledge is directly related to reality as its true and accurate representation, free from bias or misunderstandings. While realism was born out of philosophical thirst for a systematic understanding of the world, constructivism appeared (and still exists) primarily as a critical view on realism. Defenders of constructivism argue that there are insufficient grounds for postulating a reality independent of our beliefs. They oppose realism position in saying that there exists no preliminary knowledge, but the world and reality as each man knows them are merely a product of his design and creative act.

 

Although this philosophical discourse is unlikely to reach an ultimate consensus, the two –isms do have at least one idea in common: the notion of epistemological optimism. As per definition, epistemological optimism implies that everything is knowable, and that the act of learning is the engine of progress. In realism, knowledge is perceived as the true representation of reality. Since reality itself is vast and boundless, so is the potential to comprehend it; and since the act of studying does not distort the studied, capacity for absolute knowledge becomes an inherent property of humankind. In constructivism, on the other hand, reality is viewed as a personalized phenomenon; it expands synchronously with the growing complexity of one’s creative act. As such, explanatory knowledge becomes the very cause of existence of reality, instead of being a tool for its postnatal comprehension. In any case, knowledge seems to be tightly intertwined with reality, regardless of the order in which they appeared.

 

Since most points of view are comprised of a certain ratio of these two philosophies, it seems reasonable to conclude that knowledge constitutes the base of each person’s system, through which he sees, and acts upon, the world around him. Every system, in general, includes a rigid framework of methods and procedures to follow, and a set of reference points to measure the success of such practices. Knowledge plays both roles: it is essential for the development of these procedures, and at the same time it is used as a reference to compare the outcome to the expectation. A simple real-life example would be to consider education:

 

Education, noun

 

1. The act or process of imparting or acquiring general knowledge, developing the powers of reasoning and judgment, and generally of preparing oneself or others intellectually for mature life.

 

2. The result produced by instruction, training, or study.

 

As a process of acquiring knowledge, education comprises a set of steps, following which one could achieve the ultimate goal of intellectual maturity. At the same time, the acquired intelligence sheds light on the true scope of the unknown, and enables the person to make an accurate self-evaluation with regard to his standing on the path of seeking knowledge.