Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 21 views

    DDE Philosophy123 - Compressed

    Uploaded by

    Shabraiz
    This lesson discusses the origin and development of philosophy. It aims to make students aware of the roots of philosophy as a discipline and familiarize them with the major movements in the history of philosophy. Tracing philosophy's development from ancient to modern times is important for understanding the subject. Philosophy has its origins in ancient Greece, where thinkers sought to understand the fundamental nature of reality through rational inquiry. Major philosophical movements discussed include rationalism, empiricism, and idealism. The lesson establishes philosophy's long intellectual history and ongoing engagement with life's fundamental problems as key to comprehending its meaning and importance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    DDE Philosophy123 - Compressed

    Uploaded by

    Shabraiz
    21 views118 pages
    This lesson discusses the origin and development of philosophy. It aims to make students aware of the roots of philosophy as a discipline and familiarize them with the major movements in the history of philosophy. Tracing philosophy's development from ancient to modern times is important for understanding the subject. Philosophy has its origins in ancient Greece, where thinkers sought to understand the fundamental nature of reality through rational inquiry. Major philosophical movements discussed include rationalism, empiricism, and idealism. The lesson establishes philosophy's long intellectual history and ongoing engagement with life's fundamental problems as key to comprehending its meaning and importance.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    DDE Philosophy123_compressed (1)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This lesson discusses the origin and development of philosophy. It aims to make students aware of the roots of philosophy as a discipline and familiarize them with the major movements in the history of philosophy. Tracing philosophy's development from ancient to modern times is important for understanding the subject. Philosophy has its origins in ancient Greece, where thinkers sought to understand the fundamental nature of reality through rational inquiry. Major philosophical movements discussed include rationalism, empiricism, and idealism. The lesson establishes philosophy's long intellectual history and ongoing engagement with life's fundamental problems as key to comprehending its meaning and importance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    21 views118 pages

    DDE Philosophy123 - Compressed

    Uploaded by

    Shabraiz
    This lesson discusses the origin and development of philosophy. It aims to make students aware of the roots of philosophy as a discipline and familiarize them with the major movements in the history of philosophy. Tracing philosophy's development from ancient to modern times is important for understanding the subject. Philosophy has its origins in ancient Greece, where thinkers sought to understand the fundamental nature of reality through rational inquiry. Major philosophical movements discussed include rationalism, empiricism, and idealism. The lesson establishes philosophy's long intellectual history and ongoing engagement with life's fundamental problems as key to comprehending its meaning and importance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 118

    Directorate of Distonce Education

    UNTVERSITY OFJAMMU
    JAMMU

    457

    SELF LEARNING MATERIAL


    B.A. SEMESTER-I

    Subject : PHILOSOPHY Unit I-V


    Coutse No. : PL - 101 Lesson No. 1-15

    DR RATBEER SINGH SODHI


    Course Coordinotot

    ht p : /wvv. di s t mrc ededrc ot ioni u in


    piint"d orrd published on bhialf of the Directorate of Distmce Education, University of
    Jammt+ Jammuby the Ditecton DDE Uniuersity ofJamntu, Jammu'
    COARSE CONTRIBATORS : .EDITING &, PROOF READING:
    . SHALINI GUPTA SHALINI GUPTA
    . DR. DINESH JAMWAL
    . DR. KIRAN BAKSIII
    . DR. P. P. SINGH

    Directorate of Distance Education, univerrity of Jammu, &mmu.zD2l

    * All rights resenred. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form, by
    mimeograph or any other means, yithout permission in uriting for DD6, Universit
    of Jammu. 'i

    * The Script writer shall be responsible forthe lesson/script submitted to the DDE
    and any plagiarism shall be is/trer entire responsiblity.

    Printed by : AjantaArt Press 12021 l B00


    SYLLABUS

    TITLE : INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY

    TOTALMARKS : 100
    DURATION OFEXAM. :3 HRS
    EO
    TIIEORYDGMINATION:
    INTERNAL ASSESSMENT : 20

    UNIT I : NATIIRE OF PHILOSOPHY

    1.1 OriginandDevetopmentofPhilosophy

    1.3 ScoPeofPhilosoPhy

    1.4 AimsofthestudyofPhilosophy

    IINIT-II Branches of PhilosoPhY


    2.1 Metaphysics-meaning,natureofScope

    2.2 Epis'temolory-Meaninganditsproblems'

    2.3 Axiolory-MeaningandScoPe

    IJNIT-III : Theories of Knowtedge


    3.1 Raionalism$enePescates)

    3.2 EmPirisismQohnlodre)

    3.3 aPriorism(tmmanuetKan}

    LNIT IV : Theories of ReditY


    4.1 Ideatisrr - mearing, Kinds and its characteristics

    4.1 Matedatism-Meaning;charactedsticsandcomparison
    betrnrcen Idealism ard tvl*erialisn

    4.3 Realism-MeaningKindsadisbasicterets'

    G)
    ITNITV: Logic
    5.1 MeaningandNfineoflogic
    5.2 IndtrctiveandDoductiveReasoning

    5.3 Syllogivn-MeaningandRulesofSyllogisn
    5.4 Rrndaner,fialprinciplesoflogc.

    Note of Paper Setting :

    The question paper for each course


    will cosnist oftwo sectioq viz: A and
    B
    Section 'rf will cosrist of l0
    logn answer type q,estions, 02 questions
    unit with internat choice' Eactr question ftom each
    will be of 12 -rrt". The candidate
    to answer 05 questions, serocting will be required
    0l q,estion frome ach unit Totar weightage
    will be of

    Section'B' will cosrist of I 0 strort


    answer tlpequestions, 02 questions
    unitwitrintemalchoioe' Eachquestionwillbeofo4rrr{". ;::;
    Thecandidatewillberequirod
    toa nswer 05 questiosq selecting
    0l qrrestion frome ach unti. Total weightage
    will be of .
    04x5x20
    IntemalAssessment (Iiotal
    Marks : 20)
    20 Marks for theorypapo
    ln a subject reserved foro internalk
    bedistibuedasunder; assessment shall

    (i) ClassTest : lo Marks


    (ri)Tuoudtt€nAssigunents
    / ; lgMarks
    project neports (05 marls each)

    CD
    BookRecommended:

    1. InuoductiontoPhilosophy-J.N.Sinha

    2. Intoductionto Philosophy- G T' W'Parick

    .j 3. philosophy-ATextwithreading-Manuelvelasquesandvincentbarry.

    Bnrder
    4. Phitosophy- The Power of ideas - Moore Noel Brooke and Kenneth

    5. Philosophy-Avery Shortlntroduction-Edward

    6.WaytoWisdom-fuilntoductiontoPhilosophyJaspers

    7. Text Book of Deductive Iogic - BhotaNath Roy

    8. Deductive logic - Ballxishna S' pandit

    g. Intoductionoflngic-IrvingM' Copi
    I O. Intioduction of t ogic and scientific Method - cohen and Negel'

    Ctrfl)
    PHILOSOPHY
    B. A- SEMESTER-I
    CONTENT
    TITI.E OFTHE LESSON

    l. I Origin and Dweloprrent of philosophy


    l-E
    1.2 Meaning and Natu€ of philosophy
    9-14
    1.3 Scopeofphilosophy
    t5-l8
    1.4 Aims ofthestudyofphilosophy
    t9-25

    2.1 Metaphysics - meaning, nature of Scope


    26-31
    2.2 Episteinolory - Meaning and iB problerns.
    32-38
    2.3 Axiolory - Meaningand Scope
    39-4t
    :.t natonatG-@@ 42-50
    3.2 Empiricisn(Johnl-ocke)
    5l-53
    3.3 Agiorism (Lnrnanuel Kant)
    54-62

    4.1 Idealisnr - meanin& Kinds and


    its characteristics
    4. I lv[arcrialisrn - lr,teanlag; clurac.teristics

    and comparison

    betu/een ldcalism and Materialism

    4.3 Reali$n - Meaning, Kinds ad ib


    basic

    5.1 Miraning and Nature of logic


    8E-91
    5.2 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning
    92-94
    5.3 Syllogism - Meaning and Rules of Syllogisrn.
    95-108
    5.4 Fundaraental principlesoflogic.
    t09-tt2

    G")
    Lcsrol No. 1
    Semester.lrt
    PhilocoPhY
    Unit-I
    ORIGINAND DEVEIO?MENTOFPIilK)SOPHY

    1.1.1 Objectives
    awre ofthe rmts ofPhitosophy as adiscipline
    o To make the surdents
    o Tofarniliriresu(ffiwfththcmaiormovemsttsinthehisoryofPtrilmophy
    . TotreahisaicalcdireofdAoeqhicalrtedryretfiunarifdbmodenlim

    l.l2Introduction
    to harrc at least aumn*ingtxtotddgp
    Intre ofany acadeinic sbiect, it isfimdane'rtal
    case
    so that it becomes evident how
    tlre subieci has
    of ib past both dis:hnt and morc rccen!
    the shape it has at
    been understood and develoPed
    across ages' and how it has assumed
    to wh€re most other $rbjec'ts
    ofphilosophy, we nna tUt it goes toct
    *r"* t*"."r"
    LquirEs firtherback Any serious *dent
    ofphilosophy
    begin and instead ofrcsting ttere'
    canseerhdithaserrandedirr".porLt"*o"irgproblemsarisingftomtifeandthought'
    ThisisunyfthkersofaqFntfrilorUf agesoftenrypertoberfscussfurgarddeliberahg
    historical and
    to the
    on the same fundamental
    problems' Hence it is imperative to refer
    as a discipline as aprimary step
    for understanding the
    irtellectuat context ofphiloeophy
    meaing nanne and value ofthe srbject

    1.13 Origin of PhilosoPhY


    is derived from
    discover that the term philosophy
    Ifone looks in the dictionary, orr will
    sophie (wisdom)' Philosoptry thus
    meas the love of
    mro Greek words philos (fove) urd

    wisrtornItuasinr*idd$dphilosoflry'asitisrmdersroodintreWest'devel@
    aloogwilhmanyofiofnl--yq''i*tWi"touSt'tl*t1do?(atric's);Whatisrealiry?
    ntre ofcorrect
    (€pisternolory); Whd is the
    (nretaphysics); How do we know any4hing?
    C'reek thougtrt is generally divided
    reasoning? (ogic); Wf'a is J ta*U'aill-encient
    iilo t*,o pedods wi*tre figurc ofSouues in the middle, philosoph€rs
    prior to him b€ing
    oollctivelyloounasthe pl+Soqufox, ad plmoandArisotle
    followinghim.

    l.l.f Thchc,Socnticc
    Thc first philosophers appeared iu Groece in
    the sixth century B.c. and made the first
    to
    'tt"Tts trovi& a ttoorghly w,lr
    aldraionar orplanarion ofihe nafirral uiorrd- The
    ealieroglaadmsurcrelagelyo€dodaondreligious,
    mytlnhgicalandmagicalg1olds
    The first gorp ofph oaophcrs, rcnoum as tbe Mresims after thc ancient city ofM etus
    where they were fto* put formd their explanation of.the worrd in terms of natural
    eleinffi and prooesses, srch as air, uater, ft€, Ircat, coniensation etc., andjustifed tbeir
    oglamtions though rcason ard logic ralherthanreligiors fiith. . ---
    Tlrc q*tion dmnindfuE this earryperiod nas: IVha is the
    singre basic rcarity rmderlyfurg
    the vorld, thc rarrmat.rial ou ofrrti:h rhingr
    6!1 niere made? Ttralesi widely q€dit€d as
    the first philosopher, thought the whore universe
    to be composed ofvarious forms of
    nater. Ana<imenes concruded that it had to
    be air; Heracritus thought it was firre.
    Anaximaderrrasoftbopiniontraitbadto besorreihing't",rar"*,,"r.rru"*rrrirr*."
    Here we see the genesis oftu/o important ph
    osophicat probre,s: the search for a,reaf
    underlying substanoe in opposition to
    'be
    substance changes into the many things
    hpparent' things, and the problem how this
    o*
    arorrf us.
    rre see
    The lderpoblerattais,tlrcEobl@ofdungqledtotureextenresofthor4tntl€relit8
    on the one han4 believed in an wo-going process ofperpehrar cbange wlrere
    there nas
    a constant intrpray ofopposites" leading
    to cver-nerr nranifestations. Because nothing
    u,as urclungin& 'bne coutd r't st€p into the sa'e rivertwice,- he declared. On the otber
    hand uas Pannenides, u/ho denied lr*
    $€re was any s,ch thing as crrange at all, and that
    everything tut ori*od
    uas pennaneot, ides&Etibre ad clungeress. parmenidec
    discipte
    zeno, dtmugh his rrariots paradoxeq ilustsated
    ftJis rrrat alr beliefin plurarity
    his mast€ds
    and clmge was rmfoundd ard everything t'at
    $ggested orhenilise, trch as motion, nms
    aillsion
    Many otherphilosophical stsands ofthought
    ernerged o,t ofttrese basic probrems: that
    Empedocles, fororantptg wtrc postrraod
    of
    a rmiverse wtrce cbanges uue tlE
    Eornbfudion
    of four basic ard p€rrnan€nt elements aia
    fire, earth and wdter, and that of the Atomists
    wlrc conceF,alired for the first time the
    notion ofaomsi urcrunging etemar, impei*table
    andidennicalphysicalurtities ardarguedtharealitycoasistod
    ";***;-;;d
    2
    ofaoos'
    mdmms, md werythingelse rryas totc urplainod c diftrcotrragsmcffi
    AnofierdistinctschoolrinsrbtofPythagoras,u'hcrcinitnasbclicvedthatttebosic
    gpmetlot
    sfistmccofthelrcrtdomsisilodofmdernalicalealities nrmbers'rcmoret
    figuesmdsom adtberefq€iB€s.*ocuidbio-,'gedonlythurghlhesdyof
    nmdics. lnauiry,this school coalso be seearmrkingod4O SobErodlhc
    rcality'
    4paentuiuldtonrarrtsanunderlying

    1.15 ClrssicrlPhiloooPhY
    WifiSocrat€s@roteclciicaligeofphilosophy'ccricdonfinthcrbyPlao'Arisotle
    Socrab rcvq
    ad@rsrccesrrs. Unlikefu philoof,respeedingorsrcceodflttghinq
    uresyhingdor,Yn'ardweknorvofhimpiinrityfuoustteDinbgueCofPlaqutho
    w6hisdi$iple. Socrdes &vel@asysemofcritical recminginorderoeogagewfth
    thefindorentalqrrestionsorff",tonoqtehowtolivepropa.ly,howtodi$inguislt
    jusice' piety' and so on ltc Socmtic
    betwea dgb and wrong urhat rvas meam by
    mclto4asitcmetobeknorr,'qcor'sistsinbrcakingaproblemimoasericsofqrrcstiots'
    tnoughtre aswqing ofurhirfi asekercom€sto&edcsfudkmwldge'
    himselfwirli meql$ical qrstions,
    unlike his predecessors, socrates did not consa
    odnmmoreirserresfisrtinlnnrpeoplesorldbdtave,lhsmakirytim$eft$philcoDhEr
    sfro took up thc Socratic concern with
    ofEthics. This madc a huge influence on Plam p:iltaggl€o
    ofrcality,cseodaryfu
    ;;lb;---r*"ittothePrr+socraricconoeflions
    ardlhePrrrrenidcarones.Pl,roqplainedfurnrrlriplicityoftheodinuyplp,sicalworrd
    inteunsofemrat'rt"l,-d"g il;
    ediesdrichhecalledTorms' Theu'qldperc€i\rcd
    or instanoes ofthe pue ideal Forms'
    which
    by rs was cornposed ofmereipresentations
    hadtreiroraindependederdstmoed$fuerc"whenuieirqufu'eirroSusioe'frro(mpb'
    uearetrotaskingaboutaparticularlaw,s'tateorperson;wearctryhgto&finethe
    otr€rrhingEth*vrccal'jud more
    esscntial chracerisricoftb'fonrr' ofjusticgwhisall
    Plato
    fqr the 'r€alit/ as well as 'the appeararrces''
    or less resernble- This accounts both
    the
    also believed rhat 'virhre' was a kind
    ofknowledge that we need in order to reach
    ultimaregood"ufiichistheaimofalltrurrandesirtsandacrions'ftisumsolftevf
    agsncy ofan ideal society composcd ofWorkers
    ud Warriors' nil€d over by
    througtr the
    apiorrcer in many aeas ofpbilosophy'
    Philosopher Kings- Thus Pldo canbe seeir
    as
    wis
    science erc" making him onc of the
    srch as ma4hysics, ethics, episeinolory' political
    grEat€st dtilosoilcrs ofall time'
    3
    The third in the tio ofclassicalphiftxopbers uasAri,$otlg v,bo nas plao's main disciple.
    Tirking more commm-sense vle,", he oeeos€d pralo's posuration
    a
    ofthe independeirt
    Fornrs'ori$ing by thfirselves. Fc hitrt the Forms co.ld onry odst in p@ticularphydcal
    things, and tbe ordinary objecr composed of matter and
    form together made ,p the
    uiorld.Amtherseminarcortsihtrion ofhisuastte&tdopmemoftreq/sErnofde&ctiv.
    logicwi6its€rryhasisonrhesy,rbgism,whichrernainedtb&rninamfomooflogictilltre
    l9thCentry.
    In ethicg Aristotle post,rated the theory ofthe
    'golden mean' wherein happiness courd
    best be achfu\rcd by riving abalarrced rife and
    avoiding oroess uypur$irg amiddle positio.
    in werythfurg, According to tris $eory, all virtrs m,st
    stike a balae betwm the vices
    oforcess and vices ofdcfect. Accordingly, his formuh
    for political stab ity rvas atso to
    sber amiddre ourse b€fiilEen tlmffry ed dernocrry.
    Not limiod to rheuaicat philosophy
    only, Ari$otle uras a pionm in ri*rary rheory ard
    zoorog/ as rrcr! giving some ir.ndn irr"
    fte funadisciplinry nfirc ofphilosophy at tlra time.
    The period followingAristofle saw the emergene
    ofsctroors ofthought folrowing in the
    lirps ofeither Plm mArisode, in addition to st/€ral
    independeffph osophical moriumrts,
    swh as: Epicureanisg wfrcse main gmt was to Uain
    happfurcss aDd tilquiility thrcugh
    leading a simple, moder*e rife,6e orrtivation
    offriendships and trc limiting ofdesircs;
    Stoicism which taught serf-control ad fortitde
    as a means ofovercoming desmfiive
    enrciqs in qrderto d*elop clearjdgrnert ard inr. carrn
    ard trre ultirnme got oftreedun
    fiomsutrerinsfldN€o-ptafionis4u/hichumsaragelyrcligio,sphilosophywrricrrbmne
    a shonginll,ence on early christianity, and taught the
    existence ofan inefrable and
    ranscedem one' &om wrrich the rest ofthe unirrerse
    ',ernandes" as a soquence oflesser
    beings' The ctassicar age ofphilosophy ended
    with the triumph ofchristianity over the
    Greco,Romanculture.
    Developrnent ofphilosophy
    Ancient philosophy waschaftrctedzod
    fu an oveniding concem with metaphysics and
    ethics- That garrc nray in the MddleAges b
    m orzerriding concern witrr ttrcorory, and trut
    in tum was ov€rridden by epistemological
    concerns in the Modem pedod. All these
    conoems criss-cross in tbe $ory ofphilosophys
    developneirt as a discipline.

    1.1.6 Philorophy in thc Middlefuos


    The Middlefux in the westu,ErE chracterizod by tlrc domina,ce
    ofchristianity orrcr a[
    philosopbers therefore was to
    walks oflife. The m4ior accomplishment ofcode'urporuy
    rnaryphilosoplryuii0rrherequiunemofrheorpsrdingC'lrigimreligionsuc'haryrdresis
    real befurg orhne Fam'inPlaonic-Aris'tdeliat
    was achieved by rkfining Ciod as the most
    ideas inthe mind ofGod- The &eek
    tndition ad by uod€i$sxling all the other Forms as
    debates ofthe time raged over the
    philosophy sun ived as'an urrbrella' and the major
    as real' or only as nanres wtich
    we
    question uihether the Forms were to be understood
    with the Roraissarrce' and the rise ofmodem
    use to refero pcticulrthings' Houwer,

    sciencearorrrdthelaesixeerrthmdearlyseventeerrthcerrtrries,aprimrycorrcemwith
    modem philosoplry was bom'
    knowledge took over Westem thougtrt ard

    1.1.7 Modern PhilosoPhY


    The modern ptflosophers were inspired
    by science ad mathonaics md the certainty ttnt
    m"al*ipfir*p-tri"aintheirmahodsadrcsults'iltddesirEdtbesanreinphilosoptty
    for our
    the most secure foundation
    as well. The primary goal therefore was to discover
    lro*f"a*oirf,.s<tanalrryorkl'lhepiorminrhisor@itionuasfieFrendrf,rilosopher
    proctaimed that unrat one was most sure
    ofwas
    and mathematician Rene Descates
    who

    one,sownthoughtsandonescertifiedexistenceasthethirrkerofthose,thougtrts.The
    o<tenral world ttrmed inwards in
    Descarcs towards
    focus ofearlier philosophers upontfrc
    Continental
    self' this idealistrend took two forms:
    tbe perceiving selfandtlre ideas ofthis
    Rdionali$&unuEinfthkerslikeDescafies'BanrhSpirnzaadC-oflfidldbniz$€ssed wherein
    the important ofreason in ttre acquisition
    ofknowledge'antlBritistt Empiricisnu
    and David Hume stessed the
    role of
    philosophers like John Incke, ieoT ge Berkeley'
    ofthe
    griups, however, agreed that the knowledge
    sensation and observation. Both
    q<ternal worldhad to be constuctJout;fsubjective
    cstainty' regu'dless ofwtrefterttnt
    or orpedence'
    certainty was derived tom rcason
    and the
    The rationaliss lmkedpnmrilyto
    Plao as a source ofinspiratiou wtrileAristotle
    The rationalists stressed logical and
    Atomists were the authority for the empiricists'
    ureertain$ of
    mdtrematical lnowledge as trebasis
    ofall krcwledge and emphasizal the
    arc caused by
    empiricists held that our sensations
    opinions aboutttre o<anral world The
    ph:reical worftl leading to pemephral
    knowledge' ad
    the interaction ofou bodies withthe
    simprvbydefinitioncouldnot
    ,ili;*, *"r"**r*.,llnowiJgewhichwastnre emphasizing the empirical over
    for the entire proceo oft"o*it'g'
    **i, "*"*, 'h*
    the raional.
    5
    IstasPlao sJmfhcsircdrteompeiagvieuroqdsprcOmessors,
    te g$FcoeggAry
    Cammfritooopncrlmanr:lfmcaoe,ryrl^"oory*l*;**il;ffi
    '
    vieqmofraiooari*andertuicisbrhdhcldtogfferturffiIries*i"t#ilil
    pesotoo. BmowlngPho'sdi.rindonofnfieradfrrm,
    Ifutaguedtdfte;il
    ofourknowledge pome:frrom seosuion, rryhilethe
    form of;;tG;ffi
    rcaonodt'edu&c,ltiesofcqgnition, corccdiryotbe emririci*sadrbafrnarisr
    rcryecriraely. Hunanbeingscanolyasqirf teteirf;d*.ft*ithas
    beenprogaumcd
    lfooughtcirov,rlfmosofperoeflfrnandrEasn;
    u,E cmno[ peroeirne, hate adde triDHlg
    raw sense im*€ssio's; I(d cocl.ded
    that the oQiece ofo,rexperienoe can be
    Eith€r
    Ere sasation' i.e. Eatter, Dorpure tho,ght, ie. fonq brt m,st arways
    be a co'biraion
    ofthe tuo, ochoingArisotle fur wtom rhingp
    co,rd only oris as a combindion offom
    aldDatt€r, andnotaspre formorpure.rft*.eparlat;y.
    Kamalsoontibrrqt grealyto Ertistrurghtir-tf"*yoftt"
    Crt"gorioUmpedve,
    vhich says that urc should act onry in suc,h a vnay
    thai we would want our ac{ions to
    bcome uni'ersal law, qpticable b evayone in
    a
    tetother indivifuals as .'ds in ltftrselws, not
    a sinilar *r** * il ;;r;
    as m€rc means, even ifs,ch ar aproactr
    would mean sacrifi3ing the gf€ater good"

    l.l3 ltventieth Centuryphilmophy


    comfug to rccenthisory' orp vould se philosophynraking
    abrcak withrhe nua$rysical
    itrearnofdisco,eringrterEarndrcoftrrc,,*ra-ai"soa-t
    m*,,e,mlrsisofmea'fu€:
    tobeis furdamenhlhsk SimilatotlrcCmtnmaf-&idshdivideinmodemphilosophy
    between tbe rationatiss and the errpiriciss,
    anAngloAnerican€ontineml
    there arose
    divide betqrcen the'Analyic philosophers,
    theAnalytic Philoqgphers led by-Moor€"
    -a ru fn**,"riofogists,rcspectively. For
    Russell, WieBost i,r, nyf" ard ofterq ,anal5pis
    ofrneaninglmeanttheanalysisof.wordsaa"oocepmr-uaitet
    ,t"oprouia*o,fuaU,
    Husserl, Sarte, Medeau-ponty€tc.
    it mean heaDal),sis
    stncorcs ofouoqerience. Ttrc analyticph,osoplErs
    *".**r* mostgeoerd
    rhrirrcd or Iogic and lftrguisdc dgoq
    while the phenomenologiss were
    morc morti"" to ondio"ry op"ri*"
    and emotions
    whiletlrerehas beenmelpricitreconciliaionb.tt,"*tlrer"fi*ffi;"r#;
    it isheartening to se contemporaryphilosophers
    like rfro_ f.r"gr, ,U"tJ n"irr.#
    Paul Ricoeurborrowing from borh
    accounts.
    the traditions in derrcfopiogt"i,ou ptiL..phi;
    l.lJSumnr.rY
    so frr' we mav
    lrokingba.k dhowphilosophyoriginarcd aodhow::F**t*U
    whihedly
    id€di$aqtainmrj*i,*= d;;-frdorraiorsrrrilosophicatperiods'
    eicdphilosphv*u*t'*;;"*nm"s*t"rmdalvingsubomcebencdt in the issue of
    plurality ofthe apporcnt rcrl4 Soqaies and his srccessors brougfu
    and ethics dominated tlp
    the
    how to live propedy * "t"i * bo{h met4hysics
    "
    fffsophicalstflioruilfuI\'IiddhAgps'ThelvfidteAgpssas'ClEisisityco'od$ing Ittradition
    folbu'ing in &e footsteps oflhe classical
    wi0r Greek philosoplry dtd &bales ofreasonard
    frculties
    umswithmodenrphtht"phyft*f;titn"O"-adhis ard ggve rise
    perce,prion, aod the lt t" th"*"f' (*syntb€si"Edr€asotrmrtpercedio
    rhilo*1, shifterl gees md bifincated
    compr€b€nsive systee T;deth
    ,o a ".,*,., thet$'o arc
    ibefhtotu,o fands linguisicphilmodvuxtpbenorneoologicatlhougE
    sill to be assimitd mdrwiled'

    1.1.10 GlorserY
    ' Metaohvsics :-Thebranchofphilosophydeqlmgwilhtheno*fuldamental
    srbsarce causality'tirDe etc'
    conceps ofreality $rh as odsffioe'
    . Elhics rThehrchofphilosdryinqufuingimtrcstilldadsofrigtrodumng"
    of charrtet ard conduct
    F-ana U4 in respect the nature and the
    ofphilosophy inquiring into
    ' Eoistenoloov :- The branch

    PossibilitY ofkroriltedgr'
    with the principles of correct
    ' the branch of philosophy concerned
    LSSLI
    reasottitg.

    ' Aestheticg :-lhebrarchofphilosophyconoemedwithtbest$ofthentneof


    bea$Y.
    ideal realities such as trc
    . Forms :-Absol'te, changeress objects ofkrowledge,
    become just'
    ,-d;t-*" by partaking of ufiichthings
    form of Justice, of
    baufiftl and equat'' rcspectivety'

    Theologv :- The srdiY of religion'


    a subject can
    ofknowledge suggesting that
    ' Subiective ldealism :- Atheory
    know nothing orcePt is own
    ideas'

    7
    ' Anetvt'rcphnmoohv rAhrcnti€rtodrypb,os@icattreoar,6icrrspesaalysis
    oflaguageas&egroperrnelhodtorcsolwit
    . rru*fyrup.rUfei*ofphilosophy.
    PhcuomcnohpvlAtuffii€fhctrrypNfocoenijtroawfrichognsiartrc
    strdy ofconsciousness and direct trunan
    er?encncg separately Aom ib origins
    and developmen! indlendently
    of the causal rhrt historia$,
    sociologiss ops5rchologisb rnay give. "*pfro*io*

    1.1.11 Quertions

    Ql) Write a slnrt no& o the origin ofphilosophy.


    Q2) DiscussltEooffifuIionofprresocrficltrilos$ns
    inthederelopmentofWesenr
    Philosofty.
    Q3) Discuss the main clrarac,teristics
    ofmodern Western philosophy.
    a4) Write a short note on rEcent tends philosophy.
    in

    1.1.12 Suggected Readingr end


    Rcfer.ences
    *acqreellingtrodslmbPhilosopfo,Novyolc
    odcduniv'sity
    ffi.
    craigf',
    Philosophy: AVery short lnkoduction,
    Delhi: oxford universitypress,
    Patic(GT., phitosopfu 2002.
    Introduction to Delhi, S*:".t n Hi"ai*., f SZg.
    SinhaJ.N., htoductionto philosophy,
    C"t"un", N.,rC*tut g*tAgeocy,l996.

    E
    Lcsson No. 2
    S ,,rer-lst
    Pbilocophy
    Unit-I
    TIIE MEAI\INGAND NATURE OFPIilLOSOPHY

    1.2.1 Obiec'tives
    ' To enablethe sd€ttts to afiemptto define Philoso'phy
    ofPhilosoptty
    ' To bring out the chieffeanes and charac*eristics
    . To help snrdents distinguish Philosophy
    t'omoitrer disciplines

    122 lntroduc{ion ofthe


    nan[e
    tlre firsttime are^uclear about the
    Many surCcnts coming to philosophy for people'
    means different rhings to difrercnt
    srbjecttlrey are strdying; Ttre worrd Philosophy
    In a very gen€ral
    people use the word to refer to aperson;s overall view or outloolc
    Some philoso'
    rcfc'to somebody's attiMe towards tloing business as a business
    way, we may
    oflife''
    general theory oflife as his or her 'philosophy
    phy' or we may call an individual's
    in this way'
    for general vrenyint' wtren usd
    The term philosoptry is a kind of syionym
    Ottrers may understand nf'm*pf'V
    L'ing apassive attitrde towads life' They might
    " life as it comes and acce'pts things
    takes
    without
    call someone a philosopher ifhe or she
    Cneece' have
    philosoplrers' like tE Stoics in arrcient
    vorryirg abod trrr. Although many
    arguert for a similar view, not aI ffisophers the
    strare
    one useful

    do'
    iiv t a"n"" pftifo-ptr is to see rihat it is that philosophers

    l23Definition
    diaionary meaning ofphilosophy
    How sttould itbe defined? The
    So wtrat is PhilosoptS/?
    words philo (ove) and
    *rno no* a combination oftlrrc Greek
    is love ofwisdorr'*,a it
    they meant by it the
    Greeks talked aborr wisdom'
    sophie (wisdom). When the arrcient
    basic and rrrchanging;
    prirrciples' an awaeness ofurlnt was
    knowtedge ofbasic laun ard
    9
    as opposed to the things that change and are tansitory. pntting
    this into perspectii..:
    philosophy courd be defned as
    the search for an outlook on life base.t
    broa4 fud{nentalprinciples. Thisconcem
    on ttreiil;;
    wifithe basicshas b"*" firdr;;;;_--'-'
    ing fea*e ofPhilosophy, ard this is what distinguishes it fiom otrer aisciprines--
    1.2.4 Philosophyand Ottrer Subjects
    Phil6sophy is ditrerrurt trom subjects
    such
    as science and mattrematics. Unlike
    in sciencc,
    it does not base itserfon experiments
    or observatioq but only on thought. Unrike
    marh-
    ematicg there are no formal methods
    ofproofin philosophy
    philosophy- is donejust by
    asking questionq thowh arguing tying out iaeas ana tesing them b1 ttrinking
    ofpossibre
    qguments against lhem.
    The main concem ofphilosoplry iq
    as tras been said before, not u,ilh
    the superficiar deta,s,
    but with the underlying flmdamentals.
    It seela to question and understand
    the common
    ideas tlnt all ofus use daily without thinking about thern. Let us take
    some instances. A
    social sciertist may specialize in a
    small area. like the social rittrals ofa tribe,
    but a philoso-
    ph.' wirl asr ' Is man a sociar being?'A
    luppened sometime in ttrc past,
    historian may con""- norrr** * event that
    hx a philosopher will
    as,-.
    *whar
    is time?.A mathemati_
    cian may study tne relations among
    numbers, br.t a philosopher will ask, ..What
    is a num_
    ber?'Alayman may ask wh€rher stealing
    is right or wong, iut aphirosr:pher
    win ask wtrat
    makes an action right or wrong.
    The aim ofinvestigatinlthese basic prncipres
    is to push
    our understanding ofthe world
    and ourselves a bit deeper.

    I.2.5 The Philosophir;! Method


    Anotherttingtlntr philosophydistina from other subjects
    akcs
    is its method the methuJ
    ofrational reflection. urriike trre sciences,
    philosophy is not concemed
    witrr discovering
    new facts' but instead reflects on
    the acts areaay rarn,iar to us to
    see wtrere they read us
    and how well they interact to
    makc sense ofthe world.
    Before we get to study philosoph;;
    we get our fair share ofraroi,redge
    about the world
    through science and through our
    everyday experience, and have a
    spectrum ofideas,
    beliefs and opinions atrout wirat
    thr world is likq and how'rc ougtrt
    to rive in it ana mate
    serxe ofit' what philosoptry does
    is make us rarionally reflect
    on our berieft; this deeperx
    our pne-reflective undershnding
    so to say, ard we are able to see
    what it alt adds up to in
    a targer perspective.

    l0
    Thcaborrepoiccobeilu$raledbydrcuinghowphilosophicalerrgagerre,lrtwiththe
    fruaMd qrrcglons of life givcs rise to vrious areas ofphilosophy. All of us irqtdre
    sdirrcinarrtifeimottetrair€ofrcality.weask qrstimsilrchas: Isndrcblfudmd
    punriew of
    prposclcss c is thele ary prrpos to it? Such qucstions a'e beyond the
    scire, ad form tte core ofthc tlpe of philosophical cnquiry toovm as metaphysics'
    Aoorter ongoing concern ofphilosophy is how we corre to know
    wh#rarre chim to
    any limits to our
    know. Arc the fve senses the only source ofexperience? Are thcre
    knowtedge? Cm nie know God? These que*ions dernand reasoing
    {d unpqiudiced
    ftd€diur"ddootrsitriettrcdooainofcpistemologyctbetlrcoryoftnowtcdgp'
    we live or.n lift. whal ae the
    Thp thfud m6[ iryortd issr ofratiooal rc,flecfion is how
    gudar&qiltichit€tcmincqncmdrtodhowwechoosethem?DoIhavery&tyto
    mletfortoniadottcrf?TlMmakesmdfonrigltuwrong! Philmophers engagewith
    ttmeqrxionsinmrnbiasodmm, aguingqreachpositiomdlokingdiBcms
    qrsrccs,adthercsrttisrheptilosqdricaldisciplineofedrics'Thus*eseebowphiloso-
    phy is nothingbrtr a raimal inquiry irto thc most fundanrental iszues
    ofexistence and

    hrnar ti lc, purstredtruphoonfrd$Esimirgmdsgunerlt

    125 Phfl ocoPLY ANormltve InquirY


    Irsthtnot&elcast,wMs€Eardesphilocophyft'omo&Er$Ibi€ctsisthaitisucmative
    itrlistioguificsrrtalCtom\,tdor|gtstobe''Thiscabeseenaiphilosoph/sconcern
    tnilh€stiblid'itrglhecriteriaforcorrectaodincorrectrhinkingaDdetine.Itestablishes
    mrms,udtodolhisr it@ealstot trdrcofthitrg$ faphilmophersaylthathanisa
    socialeitnal'forir@,itmmndonlyrhdmengmllybdavethdwry'brtthat
    part in lhis pronouncement rests on the
    tbsy ought to behtve Orat way. The bugh to'
    assrmpdmtaitistb socialaspecttdnabshmdsdiftrrftomoecreinal&Thc
    bv nomxive
    philosqhcr doe not sop attis; normalive defnitions are *coryanied
    it m€es to be humf it
    moOcs ofUavlon Giventlre abovoebd conce6imofrrtr
    foloilsthda.dvfi€suibichczryfrruradthiivisimofmmbemrmgpdadcotrfiy
    aaivifiadisoorragdAkindofnalrrffipmatnoctalways mnpafespbilcod(y'
    thisvdrrjudgEmcdis&liberaelyavoidedbfu ndral md smial
    simurhidse*
    thc'rn For
    prlmallytoorpfnintbebeliefsJ6emsoftt ir suUi€Gts ra'herrhnn evaluating
    ooryle, aps5rchologistutoutddescdbe$'tdpeopleclaimtolnowadhistaskwurld

    ll
    ed rhe episteorologis! howwc4 wourd try to find a stsrdard wtrich distinguistres
    there-
    geouire trom bogus klond@ecreims similaly in case of.ethis,
    an artkopologist ureuld
    describe moral arhrdes ard berie& ofa tibe as lhey rcu:aly exisg while
    a moral ph oso.
    pher wo'ld ty to distinguistr conect from incorrect
    moral thinking ard behaving. The
    searc'h forttese nmrn*ive criteria is no less importam qtofphilosophy tl,n is its sear.h
    for basio principles

    12.7 The Nrture of philosophy


    How does philosophy go aborn doing what.it does? How does it proceed
    in its task of
    dismvering general principles and nomratirie standads? philosoplry
    is at once construc-
    tive as arulyticar in ir proced,ra The cq'tnrctiv€ ndrc ofphilosophy
    uell as
    reftrs to is
    sySemaic ard ratioml task ofdcvelopiqg aholistic world
    view. In rhis sens€, it is a kfud of
    $pascience' which stsivcs to disover {re urtirnde, undirying
    reatityard thus go be},ond
    the appearance that we call the p$rsicar worrd, which
    is bourded by space-time. This
    supcrscience can be approached via reason and logic
    and also via ernotionq feerings and
    inhrition; humans being as mrrch cremncs ofernotions
    as ofrcason-
    The mnsttrctive view ofphilosophy is contrastod with
    thc ofphilosophy as anarysis
    As per this view, the role ofphilosophy is to examine 'iew
    ttre variou sciences or ttrcories ard
    analyse th concepb and methods they'se, incldiry those ofphilosophy
    itself In phi-
    losophS the concepts with wtrich wa approrch
    the world thernserves beconre the objects
    of inquiry. A given science x
    often has an associatod
    lhilosophy ofx wtrich firrfirs tris
    rcle. Philosoplry ofhisory, philosophyofphysics
    or philosoply oftrarr seks not so mrrch
    to solve historical, phpical or legal qrstions,
    as !o shdy*e concepts th* st.cnre such
    thirking ar.d anaiyse their foundations arrd presuppositions.
    Phil.sophy is thr*erore probably bestchaetrrired
    as a rationar o<amirutionorcritiqrr of
    the most basic elements ofour everyday o<perieirce ard beliefs. Two conseq,enoes
    for-
    low ftrom this: first, that philosophy cannot teach us
    anything totally nerv but only clarift
    what urc already take for grantcd, and second,
    thd philosophy takes noeing for granted.
    r{ere we can see hsw philosophy as construction
    ard philosoplry as arnlysis are mmully
    interwoven' since the worrc..s we are aware of
    it is to an conceptusr in nafure a
    world wtrich exhibits beauty, violence, injuSicq love ",ftex,.
    and so on the arnlysis ofotr oon_

    t2
    entails analysis ofour world' And ifphi-
    cepts ofbeauty,' 'violence,' 'injustice" and'love'
    then the uralysis of
    fo*pfry rof.., a consfirctive ent€rprise, to develop a worldview'
    *
    concepts is essential for thattask'
    ofthe phi-
    N"tt lrg *"rp* tfr" ofphilosophical criticisrn; not even the assumptions
    [g[t
    points in phi-
    are no absolute starting or erding
    losophem thelnselves. That is,wtry there
    the views ofotlrer philosophers ald ofis
    fo*pfry, -a phif*opfry is continrully exarnining
    pointorthe other' all
    olr prielfio+ philosoplry is urall+mhracingirquiry' ardatone
    reflection, and it has played a part in sl4ing
    sciences have berrefitted fiom philosophical
    ttreir dismurse.

    l.28SummarY
    mom€nt or another'
    pt itosopt icat urquiry is wlrat all ofus have irdulged inou life at one
    brtap,roperdefinitionofptrilososrysasubjectinterpetsitintenrrsofanirquiryrcgild-
    inquiry proceeds pr 'imarily byway of
    ingthe most fundamental questions oflife' This
    by means ofobservation or experiment
    rational reflection and argunent, and seldom
    subject to
    disciplines ard their conceps are also
    unlike mos ofthe other sciences. otber
    a special subjecl It per-
    pf,losopt iot ."-tirry, and this over-reach makes f,rilosophy
    resrlts
    fofins construcltive as well as aralytical
    finruiors' ard subrnits its own arioms ard
    forexminationtoo.Whiledoirrgso,itlaysdownnormsforitselfandothersuhi€cts'and
    further discourse'
    shry€s the strrcfire and content of

    1.2.9 GlosserY
    . @-AnmcientGrcco-Romanschoolofflflosot'rrythatreoommendedliving
    which one had no direct conEol'
    in larmony urur a nanual world over
    trsed to commend beliefs' actions
    and processes as
    ' Retional :- Positive term
    as rcquircd in
    rationat is to accept it as making sense'
    appropriate. To acc€pt somatring as
    ttre good'
    with some aclarowledsed goal' such as aiming at tnrth or aiming at
    accordance
    we havetefo-re we do any reflect-
    ' Prc-Reflectiver It is the stage ofawareness
    ing on our o<Perience
    is to say that it puts forward some
    Normetive:- To call sometlung normative
    or some action to be done'
    staoarra o, c.it"tiu to be followed

    l3
    , AffirTbprowofbrc*iagaconoat&rmimonccirylcpailr,h
    philorodv, itdqplyrurtc@icuta d
    "&bg.:*#,re|cars,,good,,
    hcsislolrG4'.*fog fur ota'b,wboin$oor;ar,dcriatobioctsadu,tdrby
    altgrcfu corm. Inltircdinrymrdrdriloq*rinyJesearyrlirr

    l2,l0Qallif/lllr
    a) lt/haacthcdiftrrcmrcinrutichrhcwurdmilorqdytuued?
    b) Whadoyorfiinkarcrhcmodiryonacddcmn
    ta.r,e.nfhihcophyaa
    Sciarc?
    c) Disqrt mnDdivcfru*nofffrmsqty.
    d) Whadorrrrncanbytcmtydcrkmrc r/ldiil*qyt
    l2.ll Suggcrtod Rcrdlngr md Rcftreoco
    Blacldrun 8.,TbitrlrACqefliryIdo&dontoptiloq*y,Nc+,yorls
    vangPrw"20U2 Orrfrdt tri-
    Pltrh&ebAvcryshontorodrcdoo,Ildti:
    961ry.: Ox&dUnircsity hl'sb2u2.
    Paticl,Gl,htrotsdootophihophy,Dclti,
    iu6oond}_n f m.
    Siaha,J.N., tm'o&Etiontophito4pfui,
    C"f"rr., f.i*,C.o,rf S_k Agwy,l996.

    t4
    Semesterlst Lesson No3

    Unit-I Philmophy

    Scope of Philossophy

    STRUCTTJRE:
    1.3.1Objectives
    I .3 .2 Intnoduction
    . I .3 .3 Scope ofPhilosophy
    1.3.4 To sum up
    I .3.5 Suggested rcading
    1.3.1 Objectives:-

    ' To make the shrdents frmiliar with tlre scope ofphilosop,hy.


    ' To acquaint students with the different branclres ofphilosophy.

    ' To make them awale ofthe different issues these branches deal with-

    Intoduction: The term'scope'ofanything means'the area ofworlC ofthatthing. When


    someone asks 'what is the scope ofart'- it means with whx kind ofthings isat connected
    what are the different works that art does, what are the causes, what arc the uses and
    abuses etc.lntre sameway, wtren itis asked'\rlutisthe scope ofphilosophy", itmeans
    the tlpe ofworks that philosophy does. There may be a huge number ofwor*s that any
    shrdy or discipline migtrt be doing and yet thcr,e are only some works whichoonsitute the
    mre ofa particular sndy. Thae ae cemain core aeas in which philosophical investigaion
    is active. Ifthese are dernarcated, we shatl find the scope ofphilosophli. The scope keeps
    on increasing or expanding. Just as one cannot completely specify the scope ofscience:
    whether it is physics, or physics and chemisty; or it includes botany and biologr and
    anthropolory and psyclrolory and sociologr.. .. ... One is not sur€. But abott physics and
    chemistry, one is sure. In the same way, though we cannot have a detailed scope of
    ,15

    ..'i..
    .' . ti r: ...'
    philosophy it has to include the core areas ofphilosophy.

    Scope ofphilosophy means the subject-matter with which it deals. It includes its core
    arcas as :

    (a) Epistemolory

    O)Metaphysics
    (c) Ethics

    (d)Aesth*ics
    (e)Theolory
    (Ad tle ortensive list will be quite long)

    Let 's discuss them brielly:


    (a) Epistemology refers to that branch of philosophy that deals with the
    sourceqlimitations,contingencies and nature of knowledge.It also rcfers to tIrc theory of
    lnowledge that answers que*ions such as: what is knowledge?
    And what is the difference between knowledge and opinion?

    It is science ofknowledge and tnrh. It is often called theory ofknowledge also.


    The Greek word 'episteme' is the root of epistemolory or study of knowledge.It deal s
    with wtrat we know and how urc know it.Therefole urc miglt say it is to do withjusdfying
    our knowledge.Andjustifid lmowtdge is also associatod with the notion oftrrh and thc
    ideaofbeliefThtrsthedefinitionofknowledgeisiiusifedtnrcbelief.tspistermlog ties
    to o<amine and establish the mrditions for certain knowledge.It afferrpts to answer the
    basic question: what disinguishes tnre lnowledge tom frlse knowledge? It is rrct knowl-
    edge ofany other thing htr discussion on tlre problern oflalowledge iself Here we strxiy
    what is knowledge, txiw does it originate, vihat is its limitation, can we know everything
    about a phenomenon, etc.The first or ancient theories ofknowledge stressed its pemra-
    nent chancterbut the contenrporary episternological thories put ernphasis on ib relativ-
    ity jts continuous dorelopnrentor evolrtionThe uihole terd today is to under$rrlknowl-
    edge not as a static reality but as an active process.

    O) Maaphysics is the systematic study ofthe fimdamental problems relnting to the


    nmreofultinraereality.Thetefinr@rysidlimllynpansbqrudtrlaicstm#

    t6
    term 'meta-
    beyond].It is the philosophy or theory of the 'rcal'.It is held that the
    physics' was coined by Andronicus of Rtrodes[c.70 b'c'] for those
    collected

    worksofAristotleplaced'afterphysics.TlrewritingsofAriSotlewtrichweregiven
    the name metaphysics concerned with things other than
    natural objects'In
    go{soul and
    such writings there was discussion on philosophical problems like
    other problems conceming supematgral plrcmomeDon"Iater
    on rreqhpics came

    to mean the stgdy ofthose phenomenon wtrich lie beyond nature'


    philosophy
    The equivalent meaning of the term'metaphysics' in Indian
    is also called
    could be traced to notions like atmavidya,bratrmavidya etc.It
    also raise ques-
    ontology.It is ccncemed with all thosethings which exist.It
    to dis-
    tion regarding the existence and non existence of God'It also tries
    realities
    cover the nature of life,death and life after death.It treated of
    beyond the physical properties of beings.It is that department
    of philoso-
    physical
    phy which deals with those features of beings that are beyond
    world and are immaterial.

    issqes espe-
    (c) Axiologr : It refers to that area ofphilosophy that examines value
    be divided into :
    cialty in ethics and aestlretics.It is the science ofvalues. It can
    with the issue of the
    Ethics : After knowing wtrat knowledge is and after dealing
    known, aquestionarises inourmindttutifttreworldiswtratitsee'rnstobe'then
    how shall I live inthis world? Howdo Ibehave in it? Forwe
    will be continuously
    we will be foroed to choose
    facing more thm orrc alternative courses ofaction and
    choosing' Any consider-
    among them And we have to use our discretion white
    ation tlrat we witl hing to bear on otlr choices will have
    wtrd is commonly calld
    morality,wtrichin-
    the,moral,irnplication.So tlreterm ethics isusedto referto
    volves notions as rig[rtress and wrongness^gpilt and sttame,and so on
    and wisdom'
    It is the shdyofhnman conduct hsed onmoral imputses
    it from the
    Aesthetics:It owes its name to Alexander Baumgarten who derived
    cneek'aisttraromai"uihichmeansp€rceptionbymeansofttrese'nses'Itisdefind
    and taste.
    as the philosophical sndy ofthe nature ofartbeauty

    t7
    (d) Theolory : It is also an important branch ofphilosophy.It investigates the
    nature ofreligious experiences. It constifises a deep inquiry
    into religious phenom-
    ena and is more commonly calted philosophy ofretigion.
    SUM.UF:
    Starting with epistemolory up to theologr, we have seen what
    actrmlly constitute
    the subject'matter ofphilosophical inquiry. This does not constitute
    the entire scope of
    philosophy. There are other areas like society, politics, human
    rights, feminism, environ-
    ment etc. which can be important aspects ofphilosophical enquiry.

    Srggestedreadings:

    Concise Routledge Encyclopedia of philosophy

    Infroduction to philosophy by patick


    Infroduction to philosophy by J. N. Sinha
    Intnoduction ro philosophy by D R Bali

    '!(; .

    l8
    NATUREOFPHILOSOPHY
    Lesson No.4
    Semester-1st
    PhilosoPhY
    Unit-I
    Aims and purposes of the study of Philosophy
    BY Dt Kban Bakshi

    Structure:
    l. 1 Objectives

    1.2 lntoduction
    1. 3 Aims and purposes ofthe study ofPhilosophy

    1.4 To sumuP

    1.5 Suggested reading

    1.1 Obiectives:-
    . To make the students familiar
    with the value of Philosophy'

    . aims ofthe study ofPhilosophy'


    To acquaint students with the

    . purpose behind the study ofPhilosophy'


    To make them aware ofthe

    . ofPhilosophy'
    To show the wider areas ofimpact
    subject Philosophy'
    ' To show the versatility ofthe
    is a rational
    are very closery- connected. Man
    Introduction : philosophy and rife upon his environmant
    social environment' He reacts
    t"iog. ff" fi"o io the physical and
    moulded by the
    and adjusts himself to it' fte
    is a free centre of activity' He is
    to his ideal' He reflects upon the
    environment
    environment, and moulds it according
    the nature' value and
    himself, and their relation to each another' He reflects upon
    and
    the deepest
    purpose of the world and society
    in which he lives' He reflects upon

    mystery of the uniu""", tf'"


    *to'" of his own soul' the innermost core of reality
    '"ut
    l9
    and the nature and meaningofGod in relation to human experience.
    Man, as a rational
    being cannot but philosophize. Philosophy
    is a rational reflection on life;
    it is a criticisnr
    oflife and experience' It seeks togive a rational
    conception ofthe rearity as a whore,
    which satisfies man's deepest intellectual,
    moral, aesrhetic ana refigious aspiration.
    philosophy influences man,s personal
    So
    as well as his social life. This gives
    direction to man and decides agoal of rife
    forhim. Most of the westem ph,osophers
    have considered'the goar ofphilosophy
    to be the achievement ofknowredge.
    existentialist schoor considers man with The
    all his moods, anxieties and tensions
    centre oftheir study. The pragmatic
    asthe
    school emphasizes the pragmatic value
    of futh.
    'Seeing the different approaches
    ofdifferent schools we can say that life
    philosophy are very closely connected. and
    The folrowing points show their
    crose relationship
    and the interaction between them.

    1.3 Aims and purposes ofthe study ofphilosophy


    :
    l' varue ofph,osophy in personal
    rife : In our personar life we daily
    across the problems where we have come
    to decide betwee, .ight urra *-og.
    This decision
    requires criterion ofright and wrong
    or good and urtiniate good. To present
    critierion is thejob ofthe moral philosophy. such a
    ,
    2' - 'varue in behaviour towards otherr : whareas philosophy
    influerrces personal
    life, it influences sociar life as ure,.
    our behaviour o*"o i. determined by our
    philosophies' If a man consideroqhers "*rJ.
    as ends io tt rrr, behaviour wilr be
    dilferent from that ofthose persons "rn "L,
    who consider others as means.
    So everybody,s
    behaviour is determined by his philosophy.

    3. Value in political life : philosophy


    influences political life also.
    ofpolitical philosophies such as democracy, Various tlpes
    .ouai.-, dicatatorship etc.
    lead to different tlpes ofgovemment "o-rnunism,
    and differcnt aspects ofporitical life.
    4. Value in economic life :
    Every one has to earn money in
    order to lead his
    life' The question whether money
    of the economic philosophy. The
    is a means or an end in iJii, *
    i-porturrt question
    form
    much depends on the answer to this "fp.dr"ti"; ;;;;;;;
    -' ffi;;;" ;;
    philosophical qr"rfi"rr-

    20
    These
    5. Value in social life :
    Society is a web. of social relationships'
    as family' maniage' business
    etc'
    Jatio*hip, ar" found in difrerent institutions such
    example; whether the marriage is a social
    All these are inlluenced by philosophy' For
    philsophical questiorl on the answer
    compromise or it is a religious sacrament' this is a
    society'
    and result of marriage in a particular
    to which depends the form, stability
    not depend
    parents and their children- in a family do
    Similarly, the relationships between
    alone but also on their philosophical
    on ihe biological and psychologicalattachments
    attitude towards life.
    a limit ?
    the inclividual and do these rights have
    What are the rights of society over
    it ? All
    social control and how far can he evade
    How far should the individual accept
    tt ese are pfritosopfrical questions
    which have important social influence'
    indexofits cultural
    The philosophy ofa nation is the
    5. Value in culturallife:
    forms ofdance'
    in*, ,hilosophy influences each aspect ofculture' The
    f.oo""r- philosophy
    literd,re .t"' t'" ro*t' influenced by philosophy' Ahealthy
    music, art;
    '"'y all these. To illustrate, Indian
    philosophy is
    *il; i;althy attitude towards
    on lndian dance' music'
    mainly spiritual, therefore one finds the stamp ofspirituality
    westem ph osophy is materialistic and therefore,
    afi, lit€ratur€ etc. on the other hand
    westem culture bears the stamp ofmaterialism'
    ofa nation's
    the infancy' adotescence and maturity
    The philosophy ofa nation rc'presents
    manifests cultural progr€ss'
    culture. Philosophical progress
    person denies the importance of
    7. Value in educational lield : No thoughtfrrl of
    the words of Blanshard' "The function
    philosophy in the edocatiooal f'eld' In
    is properly the same as its
    firrction inthe cultural development
    philosophy in universities
    the community'"
    of o i"ty, to t" the intellectual conscicnce of

    Themostfundamerrtalquestioninthefieldofeducationisconcerningitsaim'This
    is no! he cannot
    to what is maq because what he
    question raises another question as
    is therefore a
    beco-" onfy'f'ut ich is implicit in him' Man's nature
    *f
    become. He can
    philosophies of
    questio" ttre a"sw"rs to which have devetoped so rirany
    philosophical
    ofdifferent modern methods ofteaching'
    education which are the foundations
    branch of
    In this freld, philosophy plays very important role' There is a separate
    a

    2l
    philosophy known as the philosophy
    ofeducation. This branch deals with
    the nature,
    theories and probrems ofeducation.
    There are many views regarding
    the curricurum,
    discipline, methods ofteaching etc. There
    are different philosophies Iike pragmatism,
    Naturarism' Idearism and Instrumentarism
    etc. Any system ofeducation which
    is not
    based on the properphilosophy does
    not prov" to be benencial.
    8. Value in the fietd ofknowledge: Kaowledge
    is an important problem
    philosophy. Infact it is the aim ofphilosophy of
    to reachLe deptfr ofknowledge.
    Dr. Radhakrishnan has rightly said, ..philosophy
    is a search after knowledge..
    Many people, in the modern times,
    undermine the importance ofphilosophy and give
    more importance to sciences. But they
    forget this pact that without a philosophical
    b-asis, anr knowledge is imperfect,
    b"".u."L totul pJture can be presented without
    the synthetic flurction ofphilosophy.
    wthout this total pict..e ttrere wi, always
    incomprete knowredge' Moreover be an
    we cannot help philosophizing.
    As Aristotle has
    said, "Whether we philosophize
    o. rrot, *" oru.t pruf"."pfrir".-
    expressed in the words ofPerry
    ffris can also be
    when he says, "philosophy is
    neither accidental nor
    supreflaruar but h€vitable and normar."
    Besides is syntheic f.rnction,
    another imporent
    function ofphilosophy is the criticism
    ofthe postulates anJconcrusions
    sciences' whenever a scientis derves
    ofdifferent
    deeper in t i. o*n pu.ti"utar
    fierd, he reaches a
    depth where the process ofhis thinking
    is iot scientin" t,itlr,,o.oprri"a.
    This can be
    seen rn the thinking ofmany great
    a scientists ofthe world- The imporhnceofphilosophy
    in the field ofkno-wl"ag" i., i*rur", quite clear.
    9. Solution of ultimate problems : One of the greatest aim of the study of
    ph,osophy is that it helps in the
    solution ofthe big probtims orfire.
    phi_losophy are not ofordinary
    rhe problems of
    nature. In it we
    which other subjects fail to solve.
    ;
    concerned with those problems

    Philosophy solves the questions


    regarding knowledge, reality
    and values. So
    in a way it prepared us to lead a proper
    life.
    10. Development and maturigr of nind :_ Another use ofphilosophy is that
    develops our mind and intelligence. philosophy it
    literafly means love ofwisdom.
    It tries to develop our wisdom and
    knowledge. It also changes our outlook
    . thinking so no aspect of
    towards lifeSince philosophy is related with
    Ly philosophy' It reaches the
    depth ofthings
    knowledge remains untouched
    and in reaching the mot of
    problerns our mind gets mafired'

    the goodness are the firndamental


    In the lield of values r Trutlu beauty
    and
    11. values' These
    to the embodiment ofthese
    values of human fif"' C"a i' tt'""*t
    ac'tions'
    and thereby we perform our
    values give direction to our actMties

    Aestheticsisaveryimportantbranchofphilosophy,whichdealswiththe 'what
    pJf"*' beauty' "What is beauty' and
    *n""*iog
    various aspects and
    by Aesthetics'
    is art'are the questions answered
    answered
    values? These questions are
    What is value ? What are the ultimate
    - bYAxiologt'
    providing answers
    satis! our intellectual curiosity by
    So pirilosophy tries to
    to such qrestions'
    us
    aim ofphilosophy is that it helps
    t2. Nature of Reelity :- Another important appearance
    It tries to distinguishbetu'een
    in understanding the natrue ofreality'
    and realitY'
    ' put forward regardingtlre nattre
    ofreality' Some
    Different theories have been
    ttatt' to be spiritualistic' Some people
    have
    people have
    ""*J;;;
    consideredGodastheultimaterealitywhereassomeothershaveconsidered to be
    to be formr"tt *iqJityf*s' Som" p"opl" *nsider the world
    reality
    it to be r€al wtrere
    to Ue evolved' Some consider
    created while others tt'int it
    some others consider it to be an illusion'
    answer th; +estion of the nature of reality
    Hurce philosophy supplies the !o
    human beings'
    *a oi", **e, the inqursitiveness of the
    ' it
    use of philosonfr"V i9 that Ciyes
    us a
    13. Reflective attitude :- Another 1Tp
    to rcveal the
    attittie' riJ"' tr'" ilttom bf thinls and ties
    and reflective
    tntrlL
    matter ofan
    ways of thinking form the subject
    The laws ofthought and the of logic
    as logic' The knowledge
    i-port nt t*'"t'y oipnifo'opt'V t"ou^
    23
    makes our thinking better and
    more accurate .
    14. In the development of perconality
    :_ philosophy
    of mind is an important
    branch ofph,osophy. It tells
    us abour fte ,rrio*f,raitio ofman. It guidcs us
    to create an ideal er
    helPs ia the development
    personalitv ofmarl #ffi"lf}tffi's of
    etc. are deeply connected wirh
    says, ..philosophical attit'de
    th" rr_r, *rr*ilTfl"'ffirffi
    development of our personality.
    and psychological insigfrt
    * *rr." A" p-J
    15' rn Deity Life :- Philosophy pedorms
    a very important ftrnction
    life' It herps us ar every step oflife. in our daily
    lve can come out victorious in
    challeirges oflife ifwe have the rarious
    a philosophicar
    t -ato us broad minded
    and saves us Aom petty quarrets "ttiara".
    and conflicts oflife. There
    oflife which can be solved with the
    are many probleos
    hetp ofptritosoply.
    Iord Russell says, ..philosophical
    attitude helps us at every step
    in life.,,
    The sfudy ofphilosophy is
    not a wastage as it comes for our
    rcscue whenever
    the need arises. So philosop^hy
    is very na*tf" .uU3"o as it helps us at every
    step and at every stage oflife.

    Ph,osophy hetps us to undcrstand


    the nat*e and history ofour
    others ulords, it gives
    civilizotion. In
    us a perspoctive upon our
    human history and our present
    day experience. This reveals
    in John ,"*r," *rar,,,the predicaments, the
    prospects and aspirations
    of men.,,
    But philosophy has an even
    more importa use. It has bearing
    not only on the
    shape ofrhe past' but also
    on the shape ,t*; ;-e.
    - It is a methodical
    stttdy which distinguishes
    betqreen rrlt and frlj;-
    15' Pracc ofnren in the unrvercc:-
    Anoth€r use ofph,osophy is
    that it concerns
    itself with the place of man in
    basic questions wrrich prick
    the universe t".
    n" p.irr, view of certain
    a, rcflective m"o "f
    tim" or the other. This
    question is not enswered
    by any of tt" ,p"cia"t-.om'"
    .cient. But it is answercd
    only by philosophy. Hence philosophy
    rnan is confrontod witlr-
    oi", a *fr af the problcms which

    24
    To Sum up :- Thus it is clear that ore'are
    in need of philbsophy at every step
    1.4.
    life- He has to dways think over
    of our life. Man cannot live a thoughtless
    manyt}Pesofproblems.Newsituationsarisedailyandwehavetocomeout
    not himself have to be a wise man'
    of them. Although the philosopher does
    by which the process of reflection
    but he knows the methods and techniques
    possibilities. His vision often shows a
    is canied out. He has the visionof
    better' Thephilosopher leaves
    glimpse throughwtricha society canbe made
    whose ordinary life acquires ne\r
    his mark upon the experience of others,
    dimensions of significance'

    1.4 Suggested reeding:-

    l. An infioduction to Philosophy -AJ'Bablrl

    2. TheRangeofPhilosoPhY -Tittts

    +*t+*ttt

    25
    BRAI{ctrrs oF PEILOSOPHY
    Semcraclulrt
    L,erron No.S
    Urit-tr
    Philoaopty
    MEANINcNATUREANDSCOPil;G;;ffi-CS

    By Da Kboa Ba*shi
    $nrcturc:
    2. I Objecrives
    2.2 hhoduction
    2.3 NatureofMetaphysics
    2. 4 hoblernsofMetaphysics

    2. 5 ScopeofMetaphysics
    ..
    ,
    2. 6 UtilityofMetaplrysics

    2.7 MehphJ,rsics considercd firtile by


    some philosophers.
    2.8 Rdation with othcr sciences
    2.9 To Sum up
    2.lO Suggest€dReadfuB

    2.1 Objcctivcs:-
    . To enable students to
    knowrcality.
    . To know the prrob_lems
    ofmetaphysics.
    . To enabte thern to know
    the nature of God and
    origin of world.
    26
    2.2 Introduction
    that
    Metaphysics is an important branch ofphilosophy. It is with Mdaphysics
    philosophy is understood in this world. Metaphysics is made of two
    words
    means beyond and the later means physical world' Thus
    fr4rO*in tics. The former
    metaphysics is a zubject which ties to see what is beyond this physical world' It fies
    to go deep into the nature of things.
    are not
    It is rightly said that 'the world as it appears is not real'. 'The things
    guarantee
    otat oev seJ, . it r" are many thingp in the world ufiich do not have my
    of reality and existence.

    The subject matter ofphpics, as we all know, is the laws ofexternal form of
    as the rpal essence of
    existence. But the Metaphysics studies what can be called
    trings.

    Metaphysics is the theory of Being. It enquires into the natur€ of


    reality' It
    investigates the nature ofworld including matt€,r, lifg soul
    and God'

    Some persons consider metaphysics to be vague and indefinite


    because
    problems differently' Each
    different metaphysicians have answered metaphysical
    philosopherinterprets itinthe lightof its ownperspective. Thtts, eachmetaphysical
    it is false and mean-
    view point is timited and one sided. But this does not mean that
    ingless.

    , Some pen;gns have alleged that Metaphysics is mystical.


    This is the view of
    who fail to understand it. Ifthe adjective 'mystical' means that
    the subject of
    those
    ismys-
    metaphysicscannotbeexplainedincompletelyinteu@tnlterms'm€tapbflsics
    , tical. But it is not mystical in ttle sense that nothing can be known inrcllectually about

    it
    . 23. Nrture of Metephysics : From the point of view of problems, attitude'
    society, the natgrc ofmeta-
    metlrods, activity, concluions and effect on indivi&El ald
    physics is phitosophicat. It does not make use of the scientific mettrods
    of e:rperimen-

    tationandobservation.
    the general
    The nature of metaphysics is that it is reflective and Eies to solve
    problems' Ametaphysician never worries about
    the conclusions but oontinues for his
    search aftertruttr" The trnanimity is generally found
    in the opinions regarding scientific
    issres. The metaphysicians generafly disagree with each
    other,
    So, from.rhe above discussion it can be dedirced that the nature of
    me@hysicp is philosophical

    2'4' Prcblems of Metephysics :A survey of different metaphysical


    problems *11
    provetheirimportance forreligious beliefs.
    -Everyreligious man whilehe worships
    God, hopes that the object ofhis worship-ir
    "t"*a
    *irrt i-u*r,,*i
    rr,.,lr-*rry
    different aspects of religion have thcii iolid foundation in metaphysics, The
    metqhysicianenquiresintotherealityofGodwithaphilosophicalattitdeandthrcugh
    philosophicalmethods. Hetiestoknowuihethercodhasrnadetheworldandifyes,
    why has He done so? The metaphysician enquires into
    the nature of ultimate rcality.
    The answer to all these queries are very much important
    for religiotrs faith.
    Theproblemslike

    l. Whatisthenatureofreality?
    2. Whatisbeing?

    3. tl&atistecoming?
    i

    4. Isrealityoneormany?
    5. Whatisspaceandtime?

    6. Whatisrelation?

    7. Whatarecatrsalconnoctions?

    8.
    ' Is the world free or determined?

    9. Is thereanypurpose in tife andworld?

    10. What are'the proofs forexistence.ofGods?

    are discussed an on attempt is made to find solution of different opinions


    presented, evaluated and discussed by the
    metaphysicians.

    28
    ,t.5 Scope of Mctrphyrig
    The scope ofmetaphysics is very wide; it covers a wide range ofsubjects. Its
    soope inchdes the selt the wuld ud the God, so it has been dividod ino thc following
    bramhes.

    Tdolog/ F,pisem(

    Estulog{ lhcolog/ Cwnogony


    I-I C-rxmologr

    l) Ontologr r This is the firndamental branch of metaphysics. In it are sodied


    the aemal and teinporal, the limited and the rmlimited eleinents of the world
    and their interrelation. Its main problem is the explan*ion of 'Reality' and
    ' 'Existeoce'. This branch ofmetaphysics scarchcs into lhe ultimatc rcality.

    2l Philocophy ofrctr: - The subject matter ofthis branch ofmetaphysics is the


    nature of self. Ie main question is: Who arn I? The dictm of lhc philosophy
    ofSocrates was "Know thyself'.

    : In the Upnishads, the seers declarcd


    nI am self 'All is self . Without the
    knowledge ofsclfall knowledge is onc sided. The programmatic knowledge
    is considered to be valid only after the attainment ofthe knowledge ofself.

    Many types of thcories orplain lhe nature of this world md its components.
    Maay theories like ldealism, Reatism, Materialism etc. have beelr put for-
    umrd to know the ultimatb rcality.

    e) EschetologrrEoquiresintofiedestinyofthingsandwents.'What
    is the destiny of soul?' is the main questiotr which is studied in
    eschatologr.

    b) Theology:- In this branch of metaphysics questions are raised


    regarding the existence, mture aod firnction of God.

    2l Teleologr - Inthis we arc concemed with the aim and prpose ofthis world.
    Is there any purpose in life? This is an important question which has beffled
    the minds ofphilosopher since time imrnemorial. Some people think lhd ttrre
    is some purpose in life and world. Others like Iftrl Manr have clearly ruled
    out any possibility ofany aim oflife and world.

    Karl lvlam said "It is a mere change that mind became conscious" shows that
    life is governed by higher and spiritual values.

    Telcologr cen be further rubdivided into thc following brrnchcc r


    a) Cosmogonyi Inrhis branc,h ure strdythe natue atrd causes ofcreation

    b) Cosmoloryi The main question raised in rhis branch is whether the


    world is one or m"ny and wlrat is the stuffof ufrich the uorld is made
    up of.

    3) Epirtcmologr :- This is the third braoch of metaphysics In it we are con-


    cerned with the important problems of knowledge. We oramine the nature,
    validity, sormes and limitations of knowledgp. It is also seen how knowledge

    is possible ar all.

    Hence the study ofmetaphysics, is very important because it touches the


    important aspects oflife and takes us deep into the inner tsuth of&ings.

    Vrlue of mctrphyricr: - Some contemporary philosophers have expressed


    doubtintbeUilityofl{aryhysics.Accordingto F.H. Bradley. ,lvleraphysics is
    tb fnding ofbad reasons for u&A we believe upon Insinct". The important
    objection against it has been raised by tbe'logical positivists'rvto say th,t it is a
    nonasrul strdy ad ibpropositions
    are meoinglessMetaphysics,according
    to these philosphers, is impossible. Some persons consider its study to be
    i.defnite and wastage oftime. Bu these opinions only pmve tt4 dre subject of
    metaphysics is complo< and multisided" Each ph osopher interprets it in the
    ligh ofhis ovm pnefcrcnces. Thus each metaphlaical viewpoint in linitod md
    one side br this does mt Drean fhat it is frlsc ard meaningless.
    ij*idl' r
    r.i, f'...

    as it helps to disclose the real


    Hencc, the study ofmetaphysics is very useful
    to the basic and fundamental
    mysteries ofthe metaphysical uiorld pertaining
    realities oflife.
    it helps to
    2.6. To Suu up :- Hence, the study of metaphysics is very useful as

    questions regarding the self' the


    study the real essence ofthings' It solves various
    those
    *oi4 ,n" Coa, the relation betweeo man and God' lnfact it answers even
    the end of their enquiry'
    questions which are left rmmsrocd by other subjects ar

    Althoush some people consider it as an unimportant subject but it is not so as

    it p€rtains to the basic realities oflife'

    2.7. Suggertcd Rcrding

    l. ...,.' of Westem Philosophy-Bmerjee


    History

    2. Self,ThoughtandReality-A.C'Mukedi

    3. An introduction of MetryhysicrHend Bergson

    +t***+*

    3l

    : i.... .i:l .
    Scncrtenlrt
    Lerron No.6
    Untt{I
    Phib.opey
    EPISTEMOIIrcY MEANINGAND ITS PROBLEMS

    2.2.1 Objectives
    To make shrderts funilirwith Epistanologr as a branch ofphilosophy
    . To 4rcrnF an analysis ofthe t€rrn Knowledgp
    . TobrfurgouthedisingionbctrEerrRafionalisnandEmpiricim
    . To intoduce to the strdeds tbetfure inporAt&oories ofmlt
    2.2.2 krhoduction
    wlut does it mear to know something? whr mcans sho,ld be usod to deternrine the
    ofthings? Is it right o deperd on trre evidcnce ofoureyes
    tr{t
    and earg on o,r senses ofsmcfl,
    taste, and touch? what is more ts,shrcrtrry
    our-rafionar mind and its rogic, or whato,r
    heart tclls us?Are things tnre for one person
    but not for anottrer; in otber wordc
    olirctive or subjoctive? can h,man beings ever claim
    is tut
    to rchieve reriabre krowredge, or is
    it fteir &te to rcmain satisfiod withtpries,
    assrmpions, opitrions, ard betie&? rrrcse are
    some ofthe probrerns tackred by eplsanorogr Jus as maaphlrsics dears wirh rcarity
    ad
    ties to diffelentiate it from mere appearance, epistemolog
    dcals with knowledge and
    to distinguish between what is knowredge
    'fierytpts and nfiar nerery appears as knowr-
    edge' Therc are a varietyoftopics on urhich
    human beings have a wide range ofopinions,
    htr it is importut to krow wharrer these opinions
    are genuine; unret,er we reary knowor
    only think th* ne how. This is wtrd makes
    knowtodge as nell as tp trroory ofhowredge
    soimpoftnt

    223Definition
    Fpistamlogrisanothernanrcforthetwyofimowtedge
    Theu"d,episbnolos/co*
    fiomtheGre.kurodsepisterrenearingkrowredgeJrogosm€oiogscire.
    hancieit
    Gteekphilosophy,epistemewasfteopositeofdoxaufuichmeantmercbelrdoloynton'
    Thsrefore ore ofrhe imporbtr oon$ihrcgils ofa definition of
    episenrolory is tbe disitption

    betrilwrknowledgpardopinionEpistamolorymaybedeftredasab'ranchofphitosophy
    wtrichdealswithknowledgeinitsdifferentaspec6 iborigittndrc,\Elidity'limitsetc'It
    also investigaresrel6ednotions, srchasperceptio4me'mory,p'roof,evidemce,beliefand
    certainty.

    2.2.4 Whatis knouiledge?


    Ascanbeeasilymadeorsinthe aboveamount,muctrofepi$e,lnoloSlishingedrryonthe
    qrulity, connoting a
    important conce,pt of 'knowledge'. Tbe very word has an honorffic
    positirrcvaftrc,especiallywhencompaedtobelieforopinionTheufrolepoitrofagrcd
    the way things actually are in the
    deat ofour tlrinking is to corectly adjust orr beliefs to
    larger class ofbelieft'
    world, choosing in other words - $me particular ones out ofthe
    word knowledge and our
    which are then called knowldge. Part ofthe flavour ofthe
    confidelrce in the tnrth of what we claim to lmw aises
    from the frct that we have befi€r
    our information to be tlle. It is only in affirmdion with
    tris require-
    reasons for believing
    deftres it as 'iustified tue belief,' a
    ment that the most popular definition ofknowtedge
    simplestatementofthetheemessaryandjointlysufficientconditionsforknowledgg'
    onlythosebeliefrcanbeinclrdeduderthecaegp,ryofloowledgeufuicha)aresincerely
    atrrmedby0rebeliever,b)aretnre,andc)thebeliwerisjustifiedinbelievingth€m'tobe
    tnre. The correctanalysis ofeachele'rrelrtofthe
    definition' howerrer' isopento qrmtion
    proposed
    philosophers have held different views about the naturc ofbelief, and have
    manydifferentrheoiesoftndrThesfiengbofthedeftritionhowwerrestrltsfiomthefrct
    ft*itprelsinttrebestpossiblepositiurtoknow weighingall$cevifu'examiningall
    is notnecessarilyorabsolutelythetruth
    the argrrments,prosandcons. Ttrcrcsultofthis
    limitdions oftnmar exigence
    ufrich is difficrilt to gutrant€e in viewoftre episemological
    to be true'
    but wlrat is most p'mbable and therefore the likeliest

    2.2.5 Sources of Knowledge


    Oneofthemostimportantpt'oblemsinepistemoloryconcernsthesourceofourknowl-
    constnrctedupon adirect
    edge.Isknowledgebased entirely onreason, or stroulditbe
    seirse experiene ofthe world, or some
    combination ofthe two? wittrin epistemolory' tlrc

    ,* ;rr* is referred to as'rationali*r' t*"* as'e'lnpiricisrn'' The rationalists

    1X*"
    claim that there are significant ways in which our concepts and knowredge
    are gained
    indepudently ofsense o<ireriurce, wtrile the empiricists craim thal
    sense experience is the
    ultimate source ofall our concepts and'knowledge. The former
    argue that there are cases
    where the content ofour concepts or knowledge goes beyond
    the information that serse
    experience can provide, and it is reason in one form or the
    other which provides this
    additional information about the world. The latter contest that reason
    can never be the
    source ofconcepts or knowledge, and that experience and
    not reason _ accounts for the
    additional information that the rationalists talk aboul

    2.2.6 Empiricisrn
    l,et us trlk about empfuicisrn first It is the viewthat sense percepion,
    chiefly our abirity to
    see and hear, is the best means to grasp rcality. It
    claims ft;tonry the information provided
    by the senses can be husted, and sense evidence mustjustify
    whatever is accepted by us
    as true. we know the color ofa thing by seeing it,
    its texture by touching, its flavour by
    tasting, its odourby smerling and its sound by hearing it
    Everything we do lcroq we know
    lhrough this apparatus only. Our concepb depend rpon
    our experience; there is nothing in
    the intellect that was not previously in the senses.
    Howevor, the problem with this theory is that our senses
    can deceive us. A tee at the far
    end ofa steet can appear as a penion to us in dim light.
    we claim to see the sun rise and
    set, and to see ttre stars twinkle, wheq in fact, these are nothing more than illusions.
    Similarly, the earttr may appear to be stationary, but it is
    rotating on its axis, orbiting the
    sun' All these facts are contrary to our direct sense
    experience but are real nevertreress.
    Serxe perception carmot therefore be called infallible.

    22.7 Rationalisn
    Rationalism is a rival position, offering an altemative theory ofknowlqdge.
    Rationarists
    claim that there are significant ways in whicrr our
    knowledge is gained independently of
    sense experience. According to this view, we
    should use our reason, rather than sense
    perception, to determine reality. Everything must
    be tested in the right ofrationarity, so that
    any mistakes made brr. the senses can be corrected.
    For example, we realize that the
    'snake'we arc getting frightened ofin the dark is actrally a rope
    because it is too stationary
    and rigid to be a snake. Agai4 ifa magician pulls a
    rabbit out ofan empty hat, there must
    be a tick to it. The hat might have a firse bottor4
    ormaybe trre rabbit was inttre magiciar's

    34
    out ofthin air'
    sleeve, but rabbits cannot mat€rialize
    is grounded primarily in rcasou
    not sense perceP
    Matrematical knowledge for example, o be
    offour inctr"s' then we know its volume
    tion. For example, ifa square has one side
    We do not go
    inches' or sixty-four cubic inches'
    four inches times four inches times four
    This theorem can be logically
    proven; it is con-
    out in the world and measue the side'
    ceived rattrer than Pereived"
    The principal
    wea}nesses as an epistemic theory'
    However, rationalism also has certain
    a stucture ofthought' howwer
    rationat' accurately
    defect is that we nwer knowwhether
    frt together colrcr€ntly' they may not
    a"O"." r*ri r. t
    other words, although ideas may
    detective novels where the evidence
    *1.*, r*r" ""ta world' It is not unlikeor those
    slre had the opportunity and
    the motivg was
    person as the killer. He
    *]ro, ""*r
    o
    and so forth. Everything makes
    se,nse, ht
    head urering athmed, has ahistory ofviole,lrce,
    tlre ctime'
    it trms or.t that someone else committed

    2.2.8 Kant's Contihrtion


    at loggeilrcads
    ernpiricist uuldviews seem to be
    Atthe first glance, fterationalist and the
    as if reason and
    g'ounds-betwe"r' the tw:: appears
    with each other, with no commo" .It
    to Lh other wittr no possibility
    ofa compromise. How-
    sense experience are antirhetical
    c€ntry G€r-
    tnro was achieved b,' tt€ eighte€nth
    wer an ingenious synlhesis between the in
    Immanrl *-rt A*gt"ud with the rdionaliss as frr as their belief
    man philosoplrer
    ""means oflnowledge was concemed' but agreed that
    the power ofreason as the ultimate
    ernpiricist
    dre mind had an active rot" to
    pt"y in o" }nowing p'rocess' He ageedwiththe
    but attacked their
    that all our knowl"ag" ii U"'"a on o* e:rperience ofthe world'
    view
    senses record their impres-
    rasa or blank slate on wtrich
    idea of a passive min{ atabula
    thougtr "' ' 'rhete can be no doubt
    thd all orn lnowl-
    sions. Thus Kant declared that even
    ; does not foUow tfrat it aU arises
    out oforperience"'We
    edge begfuts wilh experience, " 'it
    manner'
    oryans' but in avague and undefined
    petceive things no doubt due to our sense
    orgadzing
    the mind itselfcontibutes importrnt
    We knou'things as oliects oJy because
    time erc')
    effect' beinS ordered in space and
    principles (such as retatiors ofcause and
    are contibuted-
    possible' These organiang principles
    wtrich make knowledge ofobjects
    inlhevmrld'o<i$ing independurtlyof
    bytlrcp€rceiving"r$*ttd;O-''beingortttrere
    nor lure thouglt"
    can heirce be neither 'pure sensatiort'
    us. The objects ofour o<perience
    mind arc
    two' Thus boththe sanse organs andthe
    brf mus always be a combination ofthe
    35
    corylea€okytoeadlottr€redrhehowingrcesso-otfinctionwelt
    in the ahserce
    ofany ofthesc.

    22.gScepticism
    an irnirirum tring to mte her' is rtd
    both rrrc errpiriciss ad the idin,rists
    come,nder
    the c€iegory ofphilosophers uiho rbink
    tha lorowiedge is possibre; trrey dispute only
    -tourever,at on
    the means to krowrcdge. Tbre have t"en,
    various poinb in the history of
    philosophy' thinkers uiho have
    "rguod ta
    krowbage is not poasible, either abou some
    spocifc suhiect r,afier' or in ayaearrlrfroever.
    rta tse is a velt ofpercefiion r+&ich
    hides the Eality ofihings trom us andpresems
    onty appearances to usr, rh,t tlrere is
    a veil
    oflaog,age vvhich distoft rcality bypridtrg
    it in wolds, and so the extenral umld
    is rrrq
    directly ava,abie to us, and hence nrc carmot
    claim to know about it This deniar ofthe
    possibility ofhowledge is cafled
    scepticism and s,ch thinkers ae called
    sceptics. Ifwe
    accep radically soeflical conclusion* lhre
    is no lanwledge ard ttuefore
    m epi*enol_
    ogr. It is houever a serf-contradictory positior
    to hotd tecause b claim rh4 \r," cannot
    knowaqrttingisiltinrrclrrcsknowirysrchactaimtoberrr.

    2.2. I 0 Phil'isophy andTruth


    as mentioneo earier, episternolosr sti\/es
    to separde knowredge trom opinion
    edge is nothing brn a true berief that
    I*owr-
    bas L:cn.l,stinec mus episteinorogr
    is atso con-
    cenrcd with discov€ring a s,re guide
    to ts,th. This leads us to the three
    nain tbeorics of
    tlllh6aphilosophcrs ttuougbortthe"ges haveposn{aod:
    a) thc conespondcooe thoory oftrxt
    b) the colrercnce theory oftnrth
    c) the pragEdic thmry of ft trlr
    Cenerally speaking, most einpiriciss
    aoocpt a correspondeoce theory of,tr. rlt
    rationaliss acceptacoherence theory. rrrevmav
    ad mos
    a"nce tlrcory holds tha
    ue astingui.rca a*, tt"
    our ideas are t,c irttey conespona to
    *o$o-
    rcality. Ifsomone says it
    is iainin& he will be p,o\rcd trie ifit
    itrd*d i" t loing. Tlt' th"*ynorrs niell ifyouhordto
    a theory ofknowledge which maintaias
    that thoughts and ideas are copies
    ofphysicar
    objects mediaied by the senses. Tln conespondence
    theory works prety well as long as
    you are dealing with physical objects,
    not so wEU u/hm youare dealing with
    ,**d*f
    36
    o{ecs noods, €rnotioos, moral tndhs, adltm€tic, and so on
    the cohelence ftpory, in conta* to the oorespodc, oe tEory, holds ltd we ae ff'tled
    toe@ thc tuth ofa strtement if it is ooherent ard consistent with on olher aoccped
    items ofbeliefand knowledgc. Belieft ae tcstod for tuth in tbe ligh ofolhcr beliefs'
    irrludingperc€DCIIalbeliefs. Unliketbcconespodmetteu/semphasisomindepen-
    dcnt reality, the ooherence theory holds lhat reliable beliefs constiUrc an int€r-rclded
    systeq €ach el€|trtertt ofurhich emtails very otber, ard it is not requircd to step out ofthis
    syst€rn to see how welt it is doing in t€ilns ofcorcspod€nce wilh tbe dtodd'
    The third rbory is knovm as tbe pagnatic rhcory oftnrth. Sometinres.we mry not have
    qfuical forestablishingmctrrhofancw clairU despite its being oott€rEif witr
    evid€rEe
    our oths establisH belicfr. To dctennine lvt€lh€r to aacept or rcject ig mmy philoso-
    phcrs suggest the pragmatic tcst I a way ofjudging hypotheses proposed to us for ac-
    ceptance. Ifone is given trvo hpotbeses, aod no other way of dAermining lhe tnrth or
    falsity ofthcnr, one must ask omeselfu,hat tbe practical difference would be ifone ac-
    cepted one ofthese and rejecrcd the othei. Ifthere is no practical difertnce between
    tlreirU then no mer oftnlil is at stake. In olher urords, a theory or idea would be true
    if
    it leads to tui6{ practical rcsults ed it uould be frlse ifit leads olbcnrisc'
    Philosophers rvho argrre for each ofthesc thoories are usually quitc one-sidcd in tbc de-
    fenceoftheir viens. In pracfice tboWb, rre pobably use all tlllee mclbods ofjtdging ttc
    ;tuth ofthe claims available to us. we accept some claims becausc lhere is a oorespon-
    dence wifhcnrpirical d'ta lve adoF olh€|Is bocause they fit in rrell with orn other
    well-
    prao-
    cstablished vieurs There ae still olhersrrfiich must be decidod by rypcaling to the
    fical diftrnce resrlfing trom o|r accephcc a rcjection oflhe trlh claim
    prcsented to tls

    .forbeliefl

    22.11 $mnry
    kr this chapter, ue fied to urderstarrl wtat Aistemologr cmcetr ofknowl-
    is, u/hy the

    edge is so ccnnat to epiSemologr and wttd cotlstifites kDoutledgp. Not wery opinbn c
    beliefcanbe called knorrledgp; onvthose which re tnre andjustifiable pass the test As
    ,eenthe
    far asthe source ofknowledge is corrcerned, ther,e hasbeenagrcatdebarcbett
    r*iorulists ard the empiricists onthe prirnacy ofreason over orperieoce ard vice versa- It
    vras resolved by wlren he shovred that both reason and experience wene comple-
    lknt
    mentary and we made sense of things and came to know about tlrem only thtough a
    37
    utilization ofboth s€nsory and rational ficulties. Howwer any advance in episternolog/ or
    philosophy in general frces a challenge torn the sceptics whoclaim that the human mind
    does not representthings as they are and the latter can never be knownwith certainty. In
    the end' an analysis ofvarious theories oftnrth shows how human beings have stiven to
    disinguish tuhfrom frlsity overthe ageg and ftat doing this is a comerstone of,the epis-
    temological projoct

    2.2. I 2 Glossary
    ' Perceotion The awarcness ofextemal objects through the use ofthe sense or-
    ganq as well as the process through whictr this is accomplished
    ' Thbula Rasa A Iatin phrase meaning ,blank slarc., Refers to the idea that indi-
    viduals are bom without built-in mental coritent an:l.that therefore all knowledge comes
    fiom orperience or perception

    2.2.13 Questions
    a) Define episunolog. Whyis it impoftantto distinguistrlnowledge fiom opinion?
    b) What is meant byjusified tnre beliefl
    c) Discuss Kant's critique ofthe rationalis empiricist debarc.
    d) What are the various theories oftn*h?

    2.2. 14 Suggested Readings and References


    Craig,E., Philosophy: AVery Short Intrroductioq Delhi: Or<ford University press, 2002.
    PdicbGT., Intoductionto Philosophy, Delhi: Surjeet publications, 197g.
    Russell, B. The History ofwestenr Philosophy, New york American Book Statford press,
    1947.
    Sinhal.N.,Intoduction to Philosophy, Calcutta: New Cental BookAgency,l996. '

    *t

    .38
    PhilosophY.
    Unit-m
    2.3 Meaning and ScoPe ofAxiologt

    2.3.1 Objectives
    To maki students familiar with axiologr as abranch ofphilosophy :"'
    ' To definethe term axiolory
    ' To study tlre subdivisions ofa<iologr

    23.2 introduction and meaning of axiologt


    is an attempt to
    Liobg is ttra branch of philosophy which is concemed withvalues.It mostwortlr
    and rccornrnend princffi for deciding
    wint actions and qualities arc
    discover
    ofvalue but investigation ofis nature as
    while and why they are so.It is not only the strdy
    preference or simply some kind of human
    it enquires if value is a firlfillment ofdesire3
    intercst.About criteriaofvalue
    jtvaifies ifnrles and standards ofwlues canbe setRegarding
    metaphysicalstrfilsofvaluegaxioloryfindsorfhowarevaluesreldedtoscientificfacts?.
    What ultimate worttr do human rralues have,
    if anf Is value deperrderrtrrpon the presence

    ofhumanbeings?
    sci-
    The word axiologr is derivert tom greek'a:<ios'meaningworrthyand'logoslneaning
    ence.

    233 Subdivisions of axiolory


    and aesthetics'
    AxioloSr has two major suMivisions:ethics
    study ofwhat is riglrt or good in con-
    Ethics:ncrording to Prof-Ivlackenzie Ethics is the
    as
    antl wrong'approval and disapproval
    duct.' It is concemed with good and bad,riglrt
    behavior or the study ofmoral
    well as virtue and vice.It is the study ofvalues in human
    hwnan conduct in terms ofgood or
    poblems.Ethics as the study ofvalues afuns to€vahat€
    39
    bad'righawrongud..rte *andardsofsocicy.Erat.*ionneansdaaminingthevalrrc.
    lVhen a school boy or girr
    Teaks a rb, tte terrer a&nonistres ed sugg'sts tt at qpea*iog
    lhe ftxt is gpod ad desirablenot
    {eaking a rie.Tbe term Good inplies ftrrcrabre rcsrtts.
    Good is relatod to sociar utility-similarly fi€
    term Right implies action according to ac-
    ceptod rule or larr ofsociety. Thus an action is
    right ifit prodrm beneficial rcsulb ed is
    appeovodbysociety. E6icsisnotolymanedwirhoraminingaodjudqingrteDmd
    qualityofhunanconducthtarsowim,dedimonthenareofirahs.Itisbothacritical
    and an objective evaluation ofcondrrt ofhuman beings in society. cond,ct
    refers to
    vol,ntary actions performod by conscious human
    beings-nho can visruriz the poasibte
    consoquences of their actions

    Ethics may be divided into four m4im arers


    ofsfrrdy:
    Metr cthi.: It is about the theorcticat meaning and
    rcfercoce ofmoral propositions ald
    how theirh.ft vr{ues maybe determfurcd
    Normative eihic's: It is aboa the pradical rneans
    ofdehmining a moral co.rse ofdion-
    Appliedethics: ItisabortrbowmoalorrcomescmberchievJinspecifc
    shraions
    Descripti'e erhics: It is arso rcroum as cmpamirrc
    ethftx. It is rtrc strdy ofpeoprc,s betieG
    abo$morality.

    AESTIIETICS
    Collirs DiscoveryEnc)d@iadefiG acseticsas:
    l. tbbraodofphibmphyqsndwi6rbe$dyofsrh@o$asbeag,hsQeb"
    2. the strdy
    ofthe nrles and ptirrciphs ofart
    AesteticsisttrcbrurchofSilosofryconenodwfthftEnanreardapprcciadi@
    ofa4 beaffy and good taste. It has atso beeo definod
    as 'critical reflectionon a,q cultue
    and nafrre". It is the study
    ofvar.c in tte arts-rhe s*y oftbe bea'ty,the
    principtes of
    taste,harmony,order and pattem.The nord
    "aestheticsu is derived aom the Greek
    "aistrctitos", nrcaning "ofsanspaoqlion"
    (rhus aestheties), the brarrch ofphilosophytt*
    is ooncemod wilh tre trdurc ofat
    and the
    cri&ria ofartisicjudgment The classicar conception
    ofart as the imitation ofndre vas
    fomrulaed by Prato and dsveloped byfuisotle
    in his poeics, wtile nrodem thinkers snrh
    as Imrnan,el IGnt F w. schelling Benod€tto
    croce, and Ernst cassirer have empha-
    siad the creative and symboric aspects ofart The majorproblem
    in aesthetics corrcerns
    q
    thenatureofthebeautifuI.Generallyspeakingtherearetwobasicapproachestothe
    problemofbeautytheobjective,whichassertsthatbeautyiritreresintheobjectandthat
    which rcnds to
    ;,.dgrn*s*n""rnirrg it may have objective validity' and the subjective'
    defenders of the
    ia"r,iiy ,t U**iru with that which pleases the observer' Orsstanding
    "
    objective position werc Plafo, Aristotle, and
    G E' kssing" and ofthe subjective positio&

    EdmmdBukeandDavidHume.InhisCritiqueofJrdgmerrt,Karrtmediaterlbehrcenthe
    twotendenciesbystrowingthataesrhaicjudgrnenthasuniversatvaliditydespiteissub-
    jectivenature.Amongthemodemphilosophersinterestedinaestlretics'themostimpor'
    and John Dewey'
    tant are Croce, R. G Collingwood Cassirer'

    philosophy ofart' whictr comEises one of


    Aestlraics is broader in scope than the
    itsbranches.Itdealsnotonlywiththenatureandvalueoftheartsbutalsowiththose
    in the language ofthe beautiflrl and the
    rcsponses to natural objects th* find expression
    as beautifrrl by someone or from some
    point ofvieu4
    ugty. Almost anything might be seen
    .iiaf"."*r*rr"applythewonltoquitedisparateobjecisforreasonsthat.-"P*
    no
    to have little or nothing in common' It
    may however be that the term beautifuI has
    people
    sense except as the arp'lession of an
    atitude' which is in um Atached by difrercnt
    poenl we
    to qrit Ai"r"n, ,tot", of aftirs'For insunceJo convey wtrat is sigrificant in a
    balanoed" and harmonious'
    might describe it as ironic, exp'rcssive,
    or of
    more widely than the study either ofbeauty
    Aestlretics must therefore cast its net
    the principles wtrereby it is to be defined'
    ofter aesthetic concepts ifit is to discover

    2.3.4 Suggcsted reedings


    Introduction to philosophy by D R Bali
    lntr,oduction to philosoptry by J N Sinha
    Introdrrction to philosophy by Patick
    C.oncise Routledge Encyclopediaof
    Philosophy
    (rev' ed' 1953' repr' 1972);
    K. E. Gilbert andH. Kuhn,AHisory ofEsthetics
    Greece to the Present Q 965)
    M. C. Beardsley, Aesthetics from Classical
    G Dic,kie, Aesttretics: An Introduction
    (191); *: r

    Int€rnet source

    4l
    THTORIESOFIOIOWLEDGE

    Semester-Ist
    Lesson No. 6

    3.1 Epistemologr _ Sources ofKnowledge

    Epistemologr

    The problem ofknowledge is another very


    important aspect ofphilosophy. ln
    it we are concemed with various probremsthat
    affeci the.vardity, sources and stuc-
    It is thus, a very significant branch ofphilosophy.
    lure.ofknowledge. With the help of
    this branch we are able to.explore the various
    types ofknowledge. Epistemolog5r not
    only studies the sources but alio the nah'e and
    tnrth of knowredge. since time imme-
    morial knowledge has been recognised as
    being very important for humanity.
    "Socrates said, "Knowledge is the highest virtue".

    Epistemologr is arso concemed with the probrems


    like ttre naure and posib,ity
    ofknowledge oftime, space, relation,substance,
    casuality etc. AII these basic con_
    cepts ofphilosophy need a kind oftotal
    overhauring. Epistemologr can help us
    in their
    true and correct understanding. kr shor(
    epistemolory is concemed with the fo,ow-
    ing important points.

    I) What is knowledge:-
    The area ofknowredge is so wide that it
    is very difficurt to present an exact
    definition of knowredge' It is not possible to derimit
    such a big topic in a few words.
    Even then people have tried to give various
    definitions ofknowledge.
    Prof' c'E'M' Joad says, "Knowledge is an addition
    to our existing information and
    experience".

    42
    Russell says, "Knowledge is that which enlightens
    the human mind''
    lord
    for practical achievement and
    Prof. William James says, "Knowledge is another name
    success".

    2) Nature of knowledge:-
    is concemed' Epistemol-
    This is the second problem with which epistemologt
    ogy tries to study the nature as well as the content
    ofknowledge' Some people are of
    rhe opinion that knowledge must have a direct
    link with reason' Whatever is rational is
    true and correct.
    That knowledge udrich is not
    Prof. Dewey said, "Knowledge is always on probation"'
    help us at any every step of
    of any practical consequence is not useful at all' It must
    life.

    Branches ofPhilosoPhY

    Epistenrology -sources of Knowledge

    Epistemolos/ knowledge' It enquires into the origin of knowl-


    is the theory of

    edge andthe conditions of its validiry It


    enquires into the nature of knowledge' It
    represent the reality or facts' or whether
    answer the question as to wheiher knowledge
    to facts' Epistemolory enquires into
    it consists injudgement which do not correspond
    and causality which govem the world of
    the nature oftime, space, substance, relatioq
    concept ofphilosophy need a kind oftotal
    objects ofour experience' All these basic
    their true and correct understanding'
    overhauling - epistemology can be help us in
    imporant points'
    Epistemotogt is concemed with the following
    is subjective' In
    a) Idealism: - According to this theory all knowledge
    are real' There have been
    this world the things arc not real' only ideas
    anY advocates of this theory'

    This means that essence


    Prof. Berkely rightly said "Esse es percipi" '
    of all knowledge lies in percepion'
    got an independent
    b) Realism:- This theory holds that objects have
    alone' It is objective also'
    existence oftheir own' Reality is not mental
    Ifthere are no objects in this world. There can be no ideas therefore
    objects come first and ideas later on.

    validity of knowledge: - More obtaining of knowledge is not sufficient. It has to be


    seen whcther the knowledge is valid and correct
    or not. It is better not to obtain
    knowledge than to obtain wong knowledge. If somebody
    asks you the way to some
    place and you dont know it, it is better to.s[owyour
    ignorance rather than tefiing the
    wrong way. Ifwrong knowledge is given to anybody. It is a great
    curse for humanity.
    The advocates ofidealism hod ttrat the validity ofknowledge
    depends upon
    the ideas. The realists try to compare knowledge with
    the actuar existing facts and
    things. The truih ofknowledge is governed by the following
    oftheories.
    t) correspondence theory :-According to this view the truth
    of a proposition
    isjudged by its comparison to the actual existing facts. Ifany proposition
    or
    event perfectly corresponds to the facts ofexistence,
    then it is hold to be
    tue,

    Prof. Titus Says, "truth is the agreement betq,een tre


    statement offact and
    the actual fact".

    2) Coherence theory: - According to this view truth depends


    upon links and
    relations between the various objects and events. There
    is nothing in this
    world which can be held to be absolute and above other
    things. Ifwe want to
    judge the truth ofa thing than it can
    be seen by relating it to other allied things
    or events.

    Prof. Bradley says, ',Truth is an inter related coherent


    whole,,.
    3) Pragmatic theory: - This theory lays more stress on
    the practical and day to
    day thing and events. Any statement is true
    or valid if it works and srcceeds
    in our practical life. That which succeeds is true,
    tl,t which fa s is farse.
    4) Sources ofknowledge : The knowledge is obtained
    in a variety ofways. In
    the traditional language of epistemologr,
    knowledge must either be inbom; or
    it must come from reason; or it must come through
    the senses, Iike sight,
    hearing , taste smell, or finally, it must come
    from direct insight or intuition.

    44
    to be the source of
    a) Rationalism : This theory considers reason
    knowledge comes to us
    knowledge. According to Descarts all valid
    ofthis theory also
    through the faculty ofreasoning' The advocates
    rational is neither good nor
    believe in innates ideas' Whatever is not
    real.
    is the sole source of
    b) Empiricism: According to this view experience
    in the mind of man at the time
    all knowledge. There is nothing intrerited
    orperience' John Locke
    of birth. Whatever he leams, he leams througtr
    Rasa' or a clean slate"
    said, "The human mind at birth is 'Tabula

    Sources of Knowledgc
    validity of knowledgetlrcn
    when we have examined the definitioru nah[e and
    The knowledge is obtained in a
    we must also examine the sources ofknowledge.
    ofknowledge'
    variety ofways. The following can be the valid sources
    to be the only genuine source of
    1) Reason: - The rationalists consider reason
    have advocated reason all a soulte
    knowledge Descartes, Spinoza and L'eibnitz
    comes through the
    of knowledge. They believe that all genuine knowledge
    theory of innate ideas' All
    faculty of reason only' They also believe in the
    necessary knowledge is already contained
    in our minds in the form of innate

    ideas and this knowledge is very clear and


    distinct' Rational knowledge alone

    is genuine.

    to be the only geiruine


    2) Expericnce: - The empiriciss consider 'Experience'
    to the empiricists is a tabula Rasa
    source ofknowledge' The mind according
    or ablank slate at the time ofbirttr. Nothing is
    imgint€d on it by God' whatever
    comprises of two aspects
    is leamt is only leamt by experience' Exp9rience
    and reflection.By sensation we obtain ideas
    ofthings we suppose
    i.e., sensation
    we come to have ideas
    to exist outside us in the physical world: by reflection
    *hard'' 'ted- and "loud"are all ideas of
    ofour own mental operations'Thus,
    and'qthimking" are all ideas of
    sensation while "perceiving," 'temembering"
    reflection
    3) Inference: - rnference arso is recognized as
    a valid source ofknowredge. It is
    a knowledge which is followed by
    another source ofknowledge e.g., when
    we see smoke and infer the existence
    offire. Inference is mediate knowledge
    ofan object by virtue ofthe relation ofinvariable
    concomitance between two
    objects which are always found together,
    e.g smoke and fire. Inference is a
    process ofreasoning through which
    we pass from the apprehension of some
    marks (e.g. smoke) to reach to the inferable
    object e.g. (fire).
    4) Comparison: - It is the means by which we acquire
    the knowledge ofa new
    thing through its resemblance with another
    thing previously well known e.g.,
    Suppose a person has never seen a wild cow.
    A forester tells him that it
    resembles a cowWhen he sees a wild cow,he
    is able to recognize it because
    he remembers that a wild cow rcsembles a
    cow. He knows the animals to be
    a wild cow through the knowledge of
    its similarity with a cow which has
    previously well knows to him-

    o Testimony: - Testimony is the saying or writing ofany


    rerieabre person who is
    aware ofthe truth and convey it to someone.
    Reriability ofthe person is the
    first criterion oftestimony, otherwise we may get deceived.

    O Intuition: - This is another accepted source of knowledge.


    Many a times we
    get an inner flash ofknowledge related
    directry to the voice ofthe heart. The
    voice ofthe conscience also generates valid
    knowledge and we arrive at the
    immediate knowledge ofthe things.

    To conclude we can say that the above mentioned


    are the generally accepted
    sources ofknowledge through whose operation
    we attain right knowledge.
    RATIONALISTA}ID EMPIRICISTVIEWS ONEPISTEMOLOGY

    Theories of the origin of Knowledge: There are


    four main theories of the
    origin ofknowledge. Rationalism regards reason
    as the sole source oftrue knowl_
    edge' Descartes is the tlpical exponent ofrationarism.
    Empiricisrn rcgards experience
    as the source oftrue knowledge. Locke
    and Hume are the exponents ofempiricism.
    Kant advocates apriorism and regards rcason and
    experience both as the sources of

    46
    knowledge; Reason gives a priori fomr of knowledge; and exlrrience gives the mat-
    ter ofknowledge in the shape of dissete and unconnected sensations. Kant's theory
    is calle<t the critical theory ofknowledge. Intuitionists regard intuition as the source of
    knowledge; They condemns reason or intellect as inadequate to the comprehension
    of reality. Be4pon is an orponent of intritionism.

    Rationalistic View of Knowledge: Rationalism in philosophy believes in


    only that knowledge whose nature is rational. Such a standpoint began with Descartes
    who is regarded as the father ofmodern Westem Philosophy. Descartes for the first
    time declared that in Philosophical reflections nothing should be admitted purely on
    the basis of faith.

    According to Descartes reason is the source ofreal knowledge. Descartes


    calls this intuition. He says 'By intuition I understand not the fluctuating testimony of
    the senses, nor the misleading judgement that proceeds from the blundering
    constuctions ofimagination. lntuition springs from the light ofreason alone- It is
    undoubted, immediate apprehension of self-evident truth by reason. God imprints
    c€rtain hnate ideas at the time ofbirth. The ideas ofcausality, infinity, perfect Being of
    God and the like are innate ideas. These are clear and distinct. Clearness and
    distinctness of ideas is the test oftheir truth. The development oftrue knowledge
    consists in the deduction ofother truths from these self-evident innate ideas. Thus
    Descartes applies the mathematical method to philosophy. His rationalism is called
    mathernaical rationalisrn.

    Descartes formulated the following four principles for philosophical reflection'

    l. The first, 'never to accept anything true which I did not clearly know to be
    such; that is to say to carefrrlly avoid prejudice' .

    2- To divide each ofthe difficulties rmder examination inlo as many pafts as pos-
    sible, and as might be necessary for its adequare solution.

    3. To begin with the simplest issues and then ascend to the more complex ones.'

    4. In every case to make enumerations complex and reviews so general, that I


    might be assured that nothing was omitted.

    47
    The above mentioned rules as taid doum by Descartes showthat he wanted
    to develop a purely rational philosophy. According to him we distinguish between
    real and unreal through our reason. Reason alone is a power by which we can reach
    knowledge. And since every one has reason in him so eve_ryone can know the trrth
    through personal endeavour.

    Deseartes divided ideas intothreekinds, adventitious ideas, fictitious ideas and


    innateideas.Innate ideas areandhavealwaysbeenwithinus, fictitiousideas orinvented
    ideas come from our imagination and adventitious ideas come form experiences ofthe
    world. He argues that the idea ofGod is Innate and placed in us by God, and he rejected
    the possibility that the idea of God is inyented or adventitious. Descartes deduces the
    existence of God ftom the innaie idea of God. He proves it by saying that the finite things
    can not produce the idea of infinite beings. So God must Himself be the cause of this
    inrmeideaofHimself,Therefore,Crodexists.Heisperfectandftttrful. FirstofallDescartes
    deduces the existence of the external world from tre veracity of God. If it were non-
    existent, God would be deceiffirl

    Before even establishing the existence of God, Descartes proves the exist-
    ence of self. He starts with doubting everything. However, he says that that I can
    doubt the fact that I exist. This is because to doubt is to think and is to think is to
    exist, i.e. Cogito Ergo Sum',- I think therefore I exist

    Hence, to him : -'


    i

    l. Theselfexists

    2. The God exists

    3. Theworldexists

    Therefore, Descartes begins with a method of.doubt and tries to reach to


    definite conclusions. His mattrematical method consists in discovering the difference
    betwedn the.essential and the inessential and diffqentiating between the clear knowl-
    edge of reasonand obscure knowledge ofthe senses. This metliod consists in so
    arranging the objects of our enquiry that we may be able to intuit them.

    48
    DevelopmentofRationelism:Spinozagaveadevelopedformtotheratio-
    nalism which was initiated by Descafi€s. In the epistemological thinking ofboth
    these

    philosophers the mathematical method was specially considered to be reliable. But


    besides this, there is a distinction between the tu,'o approaches.
    While Descartes ap-
    proach was more scienti{ic, Spinoza's approach was sort ofmystic'

    Like Descartes spinoza also had immenses faith in reason. He believed that
    since reality is rational so we can know the truths through reason alone. According
    to
    Spinoza, God himself creates the world rationally. Spinoza has laid so much impor-
    state of
    tance to reason that he considers intellectual love of God to be the highest
    is the
    man. The highest form of intellecnral activity can be seen in intuition' Intuition
    realization of true knowledge.In its highcst form it takes man to the peak ofhis moral
    and spiritual development.

    climarofRationalism: The climax ofrdionalisrn in the modernwes{em phi-


    losophy is seen in the philosophy ofl*ibnitz. Whereas Descartes considets
    only basic

    ideas to b€ innate; t€ibniz considers all ideas to be fumaie. According to hibniE


    not the
    ideas are im-
    senses bui the intellect is the sourrc ofknowledge. All our knowledge and
    plicit in ow mind from the very begiruring. we do mt lnow ftem because th€y arc not on
    the conscious level. By the activity of inrcllect these ideas gradually come to light
    and

    therefore become clear. To illusbate this point Lribntiz has given the example ofa
    horse

    who has the capacity of running inhercnt in him but who does not actually nrn
    without
    gett'rne beating with the whip.similarly, though the ideas are already in lhe intellect the
    sense experience gives thern occasion to be expressed- Jus as
    the whip does not glve any
    for the
    new capacityto the horse similarly the sense a<perience only p,resents an occasion
    innarc krowledge to manifest

    Man has ttre intellect by which he knows the God and the necessary and etemal
    mt's.Int€llectmalcstlreideasmanifested.Thusknowledgeconsissofideas.Thisview
    takes rarimalisrn to its clirru(
    Charec'teristics of Rationalism :-
    (l) Mind is active and not Passive

    According to Descartes only the root ideas ae innale wlrereas accordingto l€ibniz
    a)
    49
    all ideas are innate.

    (3) sensory perceptions do not give knowledge but only occasion for it.

    (4) Onlythrouglrintellectwecanarriveatdefinite,tnreardrmiversalknowledge.

    (5) Reasonaloneisthefinaltestimonyofknowledge.

    50
    THEORIESOFKNO}VLEDGE

    Semesterlst Lesron No. 7

    Unit-m Philcophy

    32 Epistemologr - Sourcer of Knowledge

    Empiricist vien' of krowledge:-Errpircisrn is the philosophy which consider


    empirical experience to be the sole source ofknowledge. According to it man attains
    l<rrowledge tuu€h the sensaiors rcceived by his sense organs. The erpiriciss ae agins
    the theory of irmate ideas. Ircke-lhe frther ofmodern empiricism considers the child's
    mind as Tebule Rrsr. The mind is a blank sheet on which the sensations leave their
    impressions. Thus tre matter oflcrnwledge comes trorn outside the mfurL The empidcists
    do not admit the existence ofanything which is not subject to sensual experience. Thus
    David Hume reftses that the ideas are the objects ofour knowledge.We do not know alry
    mind in wirich they live. The concept ofmind thelefore is baseless. Hume's skepticism
    shows tre cutnination enrptcisn f,tilosophical problemq tlre skeptics sry, can not
    lvtrost

    be solved, as their objecfs are not subject to experience. So Hume concluded tlEt only
    kmwledge of Science ard lvldemtics is possible. Thus Hume led ernpiricisrn to ske6i-
    cis.
    I Johrt trougtr
    uas ofthe frm frilh drat man can achieve all valid knowledge
    "k"
    sens*ion and does not rcquire any inn;ate ideas. He has advanced a number ofctiticisn

    against tbe tbeory ofinnate ideas.

    l) All the innate ideas should precede our experience and intellectual
    derclopmat

    2) These ideas should be known both to the children and fools.

    3) The relative, moral and religious ideas camot be callod innAte

    4) In the absence of extenul impressions there carmot be any innae idea lnown or
    trrlcpwn

    5l
    It is true that Locke rejects the theory ofinnarc ideas and refuses to believe
    that there are innate ideas. But the believes in the capacity ofmind to achieve knowl-
    edge. When a child is bom, his mind is like a blank sheet. As and when he grows his
    mind acquires knowledge through sensation and reflections.

    The extemal objects are made known to us by sensations. Reflection is the


    source ofknowledge about the inner states ofmind. Mind passively receives ideas
    and does not mdke any effort to perceive the qualities ofthe extemal objects.

    Development of Empircism:-After John locke, the empirical philosophy


    developed in the thought of B€*ley. Berkley admitted the idea and the object to
    be the two aspects ofthe same process. Acc to him the very existence of the
    objcct depends upon the presence of idea.. Thus it is clear that Berkley did not
    admit lrcke's mpiricisnr as it is, but approached it critically. The only similarity
    which one finds in the thought ofboth these philosophers is ttrat both admit that the
    source ofknowledge lies in experience.

    One finds two mutually contadictory currents in Berkley's epistemolory. On the one
    hand, he is an empiricist and gives a most systematic form at Locke's principles of
    knowledge. On the other hand, he appears to be an intellectualist because he admits
    mind and its ideas to be the sole reality.

    Climar of cmpircism :- Just as Berkley dcveloped his philosophy through a criti-


    cism of lncke's ideas, similarly David Hume developed his thought through a criti-
    cism ofBerkley's theory ofknowledge. According to Lncke the mind and the exter-
    nal objects are required for knowledge. Berkley conceives perception to be the es-
    sence ofexistence and therefore does not admit the existence ofanything oubide the
    mind and its ideas. Hume denies even the existence ofmind because it is not subject
    to experience. Thus the current ofthought begun by Locke and Berkley reached its
    culmination in the Philosophy ofDavid Hume. Like Locke and Berkely. Hume also
    analyses the nature ofhuman knowledge and man's capacity to achieve it and con-
    cludes that all our knowledge is based on experience. He refuses to accept the
    existence ofanything which is outside the limits ofexperience.

    52
    A comparative sfudy of rationalism and empiricism:-
    Rationalism EmPirirism

    l) Ikrowtedgeisintellectual Ikrowledgeissensory
    . 2) Thebasisofknowledgeis Thebasisofknowledgeis
    intellect SensoryexPerience

    2 3) Truthsareapriori Tnrttrsareposteriori

    4) Trueideasareinnate Tnreideasareacquired
    5) Mindisactive
    6) Reasoninthetestimony Perceptionisttretestimony
    ofknowledge ofknowledge

    7) Thelimisofrcason Thelimirofsense
    arethe limis ofknowldge opedence rethe limigof
    knowledgp

    To sum up : It can be logically concluded ttrat epistemolory is very important


    branch of philosophy. It is the science of knowledge and tnrth. Its
    problems are the
    so many
    fundamental pnobtems ofthe process ofknowtedge. It is very strange that uilrcn
    people are busy in the acquisition ofknowledge, not many think over the general qu€s-
    and the
    tions concerning the natrre ofknowledge, its limits, the relation betrreen knower
    pro-
    known etc. These questions are addressed in episemolory. Ttrerefore epistemologr
    vifu 6e basic foundxion oflmorrledge. f+ffiernologf uitically oranirrcs ditrercrfr m€fttods
    problems
    to achieve different tlpes of knowledge. Philosophers have discussed such
    sincetimeimmemorialardconchsionsofphilosoptrcrslikeHunreandlGnthaveprovd
    . Ftheepochmaking.Thuqinbdef,epistemologrsatisfiestheinquisitivemind-

    Suggested Reading:
    a

    l) InmductionofPhilosoptry4atick

    2) TheRangeofPhilosoPhY{tts

    53
    Semesterulst
    Lesson No.8
    Unit-m Philmophy
    APRTOR$'(*YI**LKAIff)
    3.3.1 Innoduction
    ThephilosophyoflnrmantrelKafi(L7z+I804)dwelopedduringtheconflictofdifferent
    theoriesofthattime,pirnarilythoseofmetaphysics, epistemolory,moralsandaesgretics.
    His ideas played a significant role in the pnogression ofCrerman Idealimr. His philosophi-
    calu/ritingsdevelopthroughtwocommonlyditrerentiateds'tagesnamely,the'pre-critical,
    and the 'critical'. The 'pre-critical'phase is from l746ta
    1770 and the 'critical,period
    refers to the years after I 780. It was in the britical' period
    that he offerred his ttgee major
    critiques the Critique ofPure Reasorl the Critique ofPracticat
    Reason and the Critique
    ofJrdgement

    3.3.2Objectives
    . TomakeshrdentsfamiliarwiththephilosophyofKant
    ' TomakethemawareoftheadranoementmadebyKantinreconcilingrationalism
    adanpiricisn
    ' To make Orem understand the concepts ofa-priori and a-posteriori in the stlc-
    ture ofknowledge.
    ' Tomakethemcomprehendthedistinctionbetrueenanatyticandsynttreticjudge-
    ments.
    ' To make them trnderstand Kanfs notion ofs.pace
    and time. .
    :

    ' TomakethemcomprehendtheimportanceofaprioriinKant'sepistemoloryand
    ethics.

    3.3.3 Kant'sEpistemologicalEnquiry^
    The metaphysical and epistemological problems that
    are very much inherent in Kant,s
    54
    some findamenbl questions coming tom bolh the
    t'rilosoplry werc his denflto anslvEr
    r*ionalis as well as empirici$ hadition The me4hJrsics in tres taditions was a sudy
    of
    and nature of
    maierial and mental substances, causation, nature and existence ofGod
    prroper fimctioning of
    space, time etc. cin the olh€r han4 the quest for understruling the
    mind was another important topic that his p'redecessors were colrcerned
    with' The most
    prominent epistemological problem at that time was the structure ofknowledge.
    Kant

    o"* a g"at dol to both rdionalisrn ard errpiricisn in the development ofhis own phi-
    r*pny.n".oo"iringltEsetwodvalschmlsil(rffuorslyclaimedthdtofi$esschools
    he declares thai
    vere right in what they asserted and wrong in what they denied'. In fact
    Knowledge, ac-
    knowledge is not propedy explained by these two schools ofthoirght
    Ka't i. thx wtrich is certab ufversal ard ressay. It beghs wilh o$edence'
    "onui,eto necessarily originate fiom it. As soon as sense+:<perience registers its im-
    but does not
    pr,essicr on the mind, the mird * once is motiraed into its own activity and
    ontibr-res is
    ordering activity is dis-
    own onlering acrivity into tlre discreE impressions ofsenses. The
    chargedby'a-priori.elenrents.Knowledgeproperisajointventrrreofbothserrseand
    uUing.ffreempfuici$smdratioDali$shigblight€donlyqteaspectoflcrcwledgp'
    Kant,onthecontrary,claimedttEtknowledgebeginswithsense,proceedsthenceto
    Kant also ansrered
    understanding and ends in reason. In his explanation ofknowledgg
    go v"rong?
    an important question - wtrere did rationatisn md enrpiricisn
    assumpion
    According to Kant's analysis both these theories are based on a common
    to explain knowl-
    concerning the stahrs ofobjec{s which is accounlable fortheir frilure
    the mird.
    edge. For rationalisn and ernpiricisrn the ob.iects ofknowledge exist srtenral to '
    Therefore the mind has to approach thern in orriler to know them. In
    opposition to this
    view,Kantmaintainsthatitisttreobjectsthatmustaprproachthemindinordertobe
    knovm. This creaed wh* is populaly called as tre 'copenricanRevolution'inthehistory
    ofrnodera philosophY.
    Kant calls his episterrological en{uiry Transc€nd€ntal'. He sayg
    I entitle transcerdenul
    the mode oforn knowl-
    all krowtedge wtrich is occrpied not so mrrch with ob.iects as with
    possible a priori'. There are
    edge ofobjecs insofar as this mode ofknowledge is to be
    lhiee modesin**rich rhe minrt pr,oceeds for ordering any e-rnpirical tnowledge. In the first
    instance,discretesensationshavetobeorganisedintospaceandtimetogiveriseto
    These pe,rcepts have to be organised fiIrther still by the twelve categories
    ofthe
    'perceptc.
    together
    understanding in order to give dse tojudgemens. Percepts and conceptsjoined
    by the
    yield enrpirical knowledge p'roper. Afilflrer process of synthesis is etrecad a-priori

    55
    three ideas ofreasoq namely, the worl4 soul and God. HoureveB these ideas are regula-
    tive only and concenring theur no knowledge is possible. This conclusion ofKan!
    con-
    oerning the ulnowability ofeverything $pras€nsible is known asAgnosicisn
    Agnosticism is that branch ofphilosophy according to which it is claimed that human
    beings have no faculty fuknowing certainultimate realities. Kant
    is categorical in shting
    that 'we know that they are but we do not know what they are'. He says that there
    are
    things-in-thernselves urtich are unknoum ard unknouable. This doc+ine oftbe
    rmlorow-
    able follorus trom his tanscendental philosophy. According to the tarscerdental philoso-
    phy of Kant only those objects are known which lend themselves to
    human forms of
    knowing. Naturally objects ofknowledge would be tansformed by the a-priori forms
    of
    hnman knowing Th€reforc, Kant maintains tbat we can know objects only as
    they appear
    to us, colo.red and tansformed by our ways of knowing. wha these objects
    are in
    themselves apart from our ways ofknowing ofco.rse, can never be ascertained
    by us.
    Hence, according to Kan! knowledge ofthe phenomena alone is possible;
    noumena or
    ves remain unknown and unknowable. taler oq Kant has maintaine{
    although they are not objecb ofknowledge, they are ya proper objects of,faitlt'.
    so in his
    viewthe reference to metaphpical entities is only a rnafier offrith which cannot
    be other-
    wise demonshaied.
    Kant's philosophy is primarily based on the distinction between analytic
    and synthetic
    jugements. rtis disinction is erplained by Kant in rhe imoduction
    to his critique ofpure
    Reason In fict he uses this distinction precisely to dunorstrare in the
    critique the impos-
    sibility of h-priori' knowledge of maaphysics

    33.4 Disincion betnreen Syntheic ardAnalytic Judgpment


    U/hilertakingtrdiSindimb€trilEenaralyicandsyr1teficjrdge,n€ntIGntfofior6Hume,s
    distinction between helation ofideas' and 'nraJter offrcts'. He explains that
    all jrdgement
    can be categorised in these two broad categories. Kant claims ttrat q,ntlretic judgements
    arc informative and tells us abort the subject by syntlraising trvo
    ditrerent concepts under
    which the subject is assumed- Analyicjudgsment on the other hand, is
    uninfonnative and
    only serves to claris the concep under which the subject is assumed. Along with
    tlpse
    distinctions Kant also associates the distinction between ,a-priori' and
    'a-posteriori'
    judgements. the former are universal and necessary
    and also irdependartoforperiences
    whereas the latter are dependent on experience and may be true or
    false. Moreover he
    also states that analyticjudgements arc those in which the concept
    ofthe predicate is
    always colrUinod in tre con@ oftre zubjec{' For orample: 'A bachelor is an unmarried

    male'. syntheticjudgenrentsontheotherhandaethosewtrerctheconceptofpedicae
    bodies arc heaf' Howwer
    stands ouSidethe conceptofthe $Sject Forexample:'All
    trere is another criterion he uses to distinguish anal)rltc
    ud syrfihcticitdgEm€ots It says
    thatthedenialofmmalyticjudgerrentalwaysleadstoaomadidimnfrercasthedenial
    Kant uses this bac*ground to
    of a qmtbetic judgement does not lead to a contradiction
    ,Uoo, no* ro." a-priori judgements are qmthetic and not analytic'

    3.3.5 Knowledge as Spthaic Judg€'mgrfi a-priori

    to put together the a-priori and


    Although most ofthe philosophers have the tendency
    and syntheticpropositiomin
    anatytic propositions inone categoryandana-posteriori
    rientific
    anothercategoryKantclaimstlratwefindsynthaicjudgem€tfsa-prioriinall
    According to him it is beagse of
    propositions particglarly in mathematics and physics'
    aeas' Metaphpicsotheother
    suchpropositionsthatwecurhavecertaintyinthesetwo
    han4 doesnotco,nainsrchpropositionsandthereforeanyamountofcertaintyisimpos'
    a-
    He makes an atterrpt to deuronstrate how spthdicjudgement
    sible in metaphysics.
    prioriispossibleinmdrematicsandphysiaandhowitisimpossibleinmetaflry'sics'

    Spfhetic JudgerrentAariori in lvlderratics


    are rmiversat and necessary' For in-
    It is a known fact that matlrematical propositions
    s:hnoe,4+8togetftermafues 12 isgniversalandnecessaryandkrcethispropositionisa-
    pr,ori. Howeve,r, doubt arises reg3lding the slmthetic
    cbracter of srch a p'roposition [n
    we needto demonstrde tlrat lhe nrmber 12
    orderto sbow thatthe proposition is synthetic
    a
    is not contained in ttre zuhiect (4+8). Ifuit
    orplains thd the subjest 4+8 onty rcpresemts
    unitingprincipleinvotvingtwonumbers.Heerplains$Awhenwelookidotrec@tbin&
    tionofttpsetwonrmberswedorpttrinkabortrthenumber12ufrichistbpo&rdoftbe
    saysthatthe subject4+8 conv€ys a
    combinationofthesetwo nurrbers. Moreoverhe
    prrocessofadditionanddoesnotrefertoanyPoductAlthoughinthisporticularorample
    theobviousnessofthepo&disrnrrchevided,I(mtmaintainsthatifwetakel{gerurr
    bersinvolvingsixtosev€ndigitsftenwecannotreachthepfo&Etsirylybyaddingthem
    inourimagindior

    ffibeencrificisedforsrchanexpranarionbyflrilosophersvtroclaimthathesimply

    57
    uses apsychologicsl process to supporthis
    case.In orrrterto answerhis critics
    up geometical proposition to show thet tlrey
    I ntukes
    are synthetic and a-priori at the same time.
    He takes up the statement 'the straight rine betrreen
    trvo points is the shortest,. In this
    geomehical proposition Kant shows that
    the predicr*e 'shortest' is not contained in tlrc
    subject'snaight lines baurcen the two points'.
    This is because the u,ord 'shaight' signifies
    quality ardthe uord 'dprtesf denotes aquantitative
    notion qumitairre pedicate cannot
    be contained in qualitative subject Thus he
    shows that gbometical prropositions arc syn-
    thetibjrdgements a-priori.

    Sythetic JrdgenrentA-priori inphpics

    In order to show that p,re physics comains


    synthaic judgunens apriori IGnt o<amines
    the proposition 'Every effect has its cause'.
    kr this propo'sition bffect' is the subject
    and
    'cause'isthegedicale'Altho,ghurchowthathispropositionistruewitho'tan4pear
    to experience (a-priori), we arso know thar
    rhis jdgment is synthaic since a" p.ii.*
    (cause) is not contained in the subject (etre.g.
    mL xarrt srrows tha the staternents of
    physics arc synthetic as well as a_priori.

    3.3.6 Space and Tirme asA-priori Forms of Intuition


    Kant dears with the concepts of space and time
    in his Transcendental Aestretics,. Aes-
    thaic in Grcek means 'sensibility' or
    'sense perception' which is ditrerent tom any
    rheory
    ofbeauty. In Tianscendental Aesthetics'
    hetriesto slrow that there are a-p,riori forms
    sensibility. He €r*lains tha werything tlut
    of
    ure perceive must be gi\,€n in aparricular
    space
    and at a particulartime beca,se space and
    time consitute the basic condition for any
    ofperception He craims that even the propositions kind
    ofMertlrematics *ra s"i"r* Jrr,,"l
    be synthetic a-priori unless they are given
    in space and time. Thus according to Kant
    space a,d tfune ae a-priori forms. It wo,rd
    be significant to mation at ftis poirtr
    tlld wr,r
    IGnt divides the entire process ofcognition into
    the three stages or."rrs", urr"ourraing
    and rcasoning he is primarily concenred
    about tlre a-priori asln ofrrre oognitirrc prrocess
    and not with the objects thar are known. For
    him a percept can ue uortr empiricat ana a-
    priori. He.;rplainstheempiricalpaeptasonewhichisderivodfu;;;;;
    pure percept on the otier han4
    ;
    is not the experience ofany or;ect uut somettring-;*liJ
    lies at the basis of any perception wtnfsoerer.
    fn"s" prre freps are a_priori for Kara
    since they are not derived from any sense
    experience.
    Irtuitioq according to Kant' is ttrc sensibre perception ofphysicar
    objecs in their ryacio-

    58
    Thus in
    temporat relation as well as the faculty
    ofapprehending the physical objects'

    'Transcendental Aeshetics' Kant


    intenl to aea witn ru pure forin ofintuition namely'
    ln other
    space antl time vrhich ur"
    io al our ortemal and-intemal experiences'
    ,,o"tuf
    perceptsbut they are also the pure forms of
    words, space and time are not oJy a-priori
    as well as
    and time which make them a-priori
    intuition. He gives two featurcs o;space
    pure fom ofintrition TlPseae
    pu'e intrition
    l. 'Itegivdness] ofspace and time as

    given in spacio-tenrporal relation


    2. Perception ofpaticular sensations
    ofspace and time' Kant offers two
    kfuds
    In orderto elaborate fte distinct characteristics
    ofopositions:
    deals with a-priori charrcteristics
    of spce and
    a) Metaph)Eical erqosition 'here he
    time as theY are inft€mselves'
    he deals with space andtime intheirnecessary
    b) Tlanscende'ntal orposition inthis
    relation withthe objecs ofsense
    perception

    M€taphysical Exposition of Space andTrme


    ard time in
    in the metaphysical exposition of sprce
    Kant gives the following argtments
    order to show that they are ideal conceps'
    concepts <krived fiom orter experiences' In
    L Space andtime arc notthe ernpirical
    in space and
    A"t otp"'itt'"c a'" possible only whenthey are contained
    "*t"rnaf
    tine. Kartarguestlrd.n ;;;*.*praraposerhereality"f.p"*-dq:. T
    iaeaorspaceanatimepossible' it
    otherrvords instead;f;;**t;h'gG
    istheideaofspaceandtimethatmaketheseexpedencespossible.
    we can
    a-priori representations' Kant says'
    I Space and time are the necessary
    and time. They form the basis of
    all our
    never think of the ur*,"" or "pu*
    orPeriences and aPPeaances'
    is
    m. Space and time are not lhe geneml
    conc$ brfi the prne form of intuition' This
    is possible only in one space^
    baause ttrey are essentially one and rcprcsentation
    of
    andonetime.Tlre*"'ltJ-'"' *tAardmarrytimesarenolhingbutparts
    one single space ard ti-" *t'i"f'
    Ln" ot'ty ore dimension which is ofsuccession'
    to
    theinfinite.given magnrudes' According
    IV. Space and tinie are represented as
    iselflhe idea
    ana time wtrich contains within
    Kad, it is onlythe coirpt ofspace
    59
    of inf nite rcpesematioru of puts.
    ftlwitttrchetnoftheabovefo,rargumemlGmfiesto
    strowrhdqpaceandtime ae
    a-priori forms of infrrition

    Trasoendental E:positionofSpre odTune

    we have obser,ed in'tlie metaphysical orposition


    of space and time as to howthey are
    given to us in an a-priori manrm as
    thingsin-trmrselves. ro t"urru"eoao,ar orposition,
    I(mt tsies to erprain the ooncept as aprirripre
    fiom uaich the possibili-ty ofofter a-priori
    synttrctic knowredgp can be rderstood-
    ert, i *r*t" i".t rl*trattrepqopositions
    ofl\rldheuutics as Emtretlcju&Brnem
    ale a-priori i.e. tbey are a-priori "prid
    r*p".Stf" ifr.ai.fvif-ilf iil
    fonrs ofalt percepions.
    K'trt holds &d ifspace and timeae nol
    ynori rhco rter have to be deri'od fiom some
    ex?erience. Further if they are derived
    fion experiencc,fr* rt ri.rfJ *i
    apperance or they stro.ld be so'ething "fO* r
    wtrich odsts in ttbir objectivity ie. indeeenaenr
    ofmind' But we have discussed in the above
    appearance. Moreover, ifthey are
    rrg,-* rrrur rpu" and time are not an
    rhe independent rcalities then they
    can be lonwn only
    by oqerience' This would lead to
    the *i"r*ion tta trr" inp, or.* and time is
    empiricar and camot be universal
    and neoessary. lt is fortris leason that
    IGnt ctaims that
    space and time are a-priori.

    3.3.7 Categories of Urderstarxting

    In addition to the pure petcepts of\ce


    and Time, Kant deduces the prtre
    concepts,
    commonly known as the bategories ofunderstanding'.
    Kant clafuns that anyj.dgment
    though wildt u/E arrive dhowledge
    *r,+r".* *iirr .
    rra*f conceptsvfiicharc
    tlerylnait'rs ofanyjudgnentw'asoeL.A"*rdlrrCt"
    K,,,,, mostofthetimes we
    deal emniricar concepts- concepts which
    lth
    orarnple- tbe corrccpts ofhmse is an
    are derived fiom sense orperience,
    for
    ernpirical *rr.et been derived onty after
    3lervine
    "h;L
    varlous horses ofditrerent.rr"p",.,i"r
    *a'*r*. rn" ooncept oftable is simi-
    larlyanerppirical concept Kant, howeverr*.*;;;;;;;;ilffi ;#
    cal concepts sime he believed tha an
    ernpirical concept _ay vrry torn p."ron to pemon
    depading ryonhowaputiculrirdivid,al p.*.1.,
    ru *i*fyi.g objecti (e.g horses or
    tables) which forms a particurarconce-pt
    rtrrr tt *rpmJ *n"eps ha,e a subjective
    natue ad lacktlrc etement ofrmiversarity.rd "
    oQiectivejdgmentlGnt,ontheofterf,*d,r.""in
    ; ..
    "bj*d;t"t arc pr€condirtiotrs forany
    ";"dh;
    which exi-st pior. *v oG-oo *r,"*rr*-J*tif
    ##ffi
    60
    pwiblc attbe frst place. Such pure or omccpf ale dcrived by Kaff in the Tra-
    ryici
    swrdentalAnalyticardhcconcsrpwilh 12diftfttrcaEgoriesofunder*ading.These
    12 caegories conespond totbc 12 dift'ld hnds ofjrdgrrens as given inAristotdlian
    logic Tlrese are divided imo for sets of3 caegpries ear;h unrre the four sets oonespod
    torhejudgnertscomningQuality,Qrmity,RelaimmdModality.Ibeqiodcaego
    ries are as under:

    Qudity: Unity, Pluality,Totality


    Quality: R€ality,Negdioo,Umitation
    Reldion: SubstmcUeocilc$ Cause/Eft4Aaion/Rrurion
    Modalit),: Possibility/Impossibility,Eds€ocen'lonExi$eoce,Neesity/Cmtingency.

    Thrs I(mclaims'tmformyjdgpenttobepossribleaatl itmgfrlhnderthese t*elw


    cmgories. These categories ale not daived fionr oqedence httheym*e all meaing
    orperience possible.

    3.3.8 Moral tan ,asApriori


    kr his Crique ofPracti&l Reason O 7EE), Kd uses his notion ofryiori intlre domain of
    elhics. Accoding to Kant,lhe moral lar is not derived fiom orperiencg nttrcrthe moral
    law exist prior to any expedence ard must form tbe basis of orn elrtire moral conduct.
    Thus rmlike many other moral philosophers u,ho ty b derive moral lanrs ftom particular
    facts inqeerienoe l&nt claims ttut the moral la\r is basd on a pinciple n&ich is agiui
    and this apriori law gives rise to the notion ofCategorical Imperative. The Calegorical
    Imperative is centsal to Kant's ethics. The imperative stales thtore should act in srch a
    waysoastpactcanbcorreauiwrsal latr In frct inthe frst ard mo* cited foonulaion
    ofthe Categorical Imperarive, Kmt says - "Act only according to that ma.xim by which
    you cm at the same time will thd it should beconrc a universal laur." Kant maimins thst
    this imperative is Categorical in nature and hence must be obeyed at all times by any
    rational and moral agent. Kant in fact deduces the imperative force ofthis maxim by
    claiming that since moral law is apriori to human agents, it ori*s prior and extErnal to
    hllr ms ad h€ooe must be obeyed cdegprically.

    3.3.9 Corphrion
    Thus ue observe that the notisr ofryriorisur forms the comerstone ofKant's philosophy.
    [Ie uses the notion of ryriodsm to etplain the nmre and soope ofour knowledge as well
    as to develop atlreory ofelhics. While he irroducod fre notions offonns ofsarsibility ard
    tlre categories ofimderstarxting as apriori , he also dweloped an ethical theory based on
    6l
    fhe calegorical imp€rative which is apriori in nafire, according to Kant. Both ofthese
    aspects of Ikut's apriorimr- epi$ernological as well as ethical- bas had a great influence
    on the philosophylhat followod IGnt ad his ideas keep influencingphilosophem wen up
    to this date. Although many subseqwnt philosophers have also disagreed with Kant's
    apiorimr, thee can be no darying tbe fictttrat thathe pve an altogether rrcwdirection to
    the way philosophy was done by making use ofthese novel ideas.

    3.3.10 Glossary

    A-priori: That which is obtained before aly erperience

    A-posteriori: That whictr is obtained after some o<perience

    Percept Sornetdng that is peroeived by the senses

    Conc€pt: An idea tt'at is usred to m*e sense ofthe percepts

    3.3.1I Questiors

    Ql) Disctss Kmt's notion ofthe Fonns ofsensibility.

    Q2) E:rplain the difference betureen analyic and syntheticjudgments.

    Q3) Discuss the caregories as propounded by Imnunuel IGnt.

    Q4) Whar is the imporhnce ofa-priorism in Kant's philosophy?

    3.3.12 Suggested Readings and References

    Kar4L, Critique ofPtue Reaso4 Canrbridge: Cambriilge University press: I g8.


    Russell,B., The History of Westem Philosophy, New York: American Book Stattord
    Press,1947.

    Thillyf.,Al{isory ofPhilosophy, UlanPrress, 2012.

    62
    TIMORIESOX'REALITY

    Semester-1st Lesson No. 9

    Unit-W Philosophy

    MEAI\ING & CHARACTERISTICS OF IDEALISM


    By. Dn Kban Bakshi

    Structune:

    4.I Objectives

    4.2 krtroduction

    4.3. Characteristicsofldealism

    4.4. Difference between idealism and materialism

    4.5 Kindsofidealism

    4.6. To sum up

    4.7 Suggested readings

    4.1 Objectives
    . To know the meaning ofidealism
    . To understand its kinds

    . To know its exact connotation

    . To know the views ofdifferent philosophers regarding idealism.

    4.2 lderlism:
    It has been the endeavour of man to know the reality ofthe world and life
    since time immernorial. Idealism is one such theory which offen an explanation in this
    63
    cotrnection. But before we embark on the detailed study of the idealism we must
    understand hon,this term is uscd ia the rrcrld by an ordinary man- In common parlance
    . an idealist is a person who lives life according to some lofty morals and also believes
    in the aesthetics and religious ideals and values. sornetimes an idealist is d€emed to
    be a person who visualizes and advocatcs some plan or program that is too ideal to
    be practical. Ia this sense every reformer is an idealist.

    Some issues regarding idealistphilosphy:

    1) Ideal venus things:- The conflict betnreen ideas and things has been a major
    problem ofphilosophy. h is in frci a conflict behrcen idealism ud materialism,
    idealism holds ltat only i&as are realard lhings ae notreat uiheleas rnmerialism
    holds that material things are real

    2l Mentalvercu Mrteria} - In idealism the mental is considood to be supedor


    to the rnarerial. All material things are made ofmattcr. lv{ater is worldly ad a
    non-mental reality. It is rct above chatrge and mutation. Ideas are not made of
    any matter and hence they are not subject to destnrction ufrich all matter has
    to hce in the course of time.
    'ii{en
    3) verrus Mrchine: - Materialism holds that this world is governed by
    strict mecianical laws. World is a big machine wtich works according to
    scientific and deternrinistic laws. BA for idealism man is more important and
    ccntral than the machine. The materialists considen man also as a machinc.
    ldan is relegated to subordinate position in the scheme of things. However
    for an idealist, there is an inner barrnony between the rest ofworld and man.
    Mat is at the center and is not alien to the world. He is not a creation of
    chance. The Universe relies on the higher valucs oftrtrh, beauty alrd goodness.
    This process is reflected in man's search for tuth, beauty and goodness.

    Ideelism ud knowlcdge:
    fhere are tryd chieftheories regarding the nature ofknowledge :

    a) Subjective :- According to this theory all knowledge is subjective. In this


    world the things are not rcal, only ideas are real. There have been many
    advocates of this theory.

    il
    Prof. Berkeley has said, "Esse est percipi" this means the essence of all
    knowledge lies in perceptions.

    b) Objective: - This theory holds that objects have got an independent existence
    oftheir own. Reality is not mental alone. It is objective also. Ifthele are no
    objects there can be no ideas. Objects come fust and id6as later on

    4.3. Characteristicsofldealism:-
    I) E:ristence of the universe in the mind.
    2) Spiritualisticexplanationofuiverse.
    3) Teleological explanation for creation ofthe universe
    4) Synthesis between naturc and man.
    5) Evaluative explanation ofthe universe
    6) Man as the centre of the universe.
    7) Special emphasis on normative & social sciences.
    8) Beliefin concepoal knowledge.
    9) Stress on spiritual aspect ofthe universe
    l0) The universe is knowable

    (1) Existence of the universe in universe:- Idealism believes that the universe
    exists in the mind & the entire world is fundamentally ofthe nature of spirit or mind.

    @ Spirituelislic explanetion of unvierse:- Idealism is against mechanistic


    explanation ofuniverse, for it is inadequate. It does not believe that the universe can
    be explained on a mechanistic principle. According to it the existence ofthe universe
    can be explained by the spiritual process only.

    (3) Teleological erplenetion ofthe universe:- According to this explanation,


    human life and ndlral processes have common objectives which both simultaneously try
    to accomplish-

    4) Content ofEpisiemotogt: - The idealists believe in idealism. It ineans that


    only the thoughts, selves or ideas are real. The maf€rialists outrightly reject this theory
    aad give importance to matter. They believe that it is matter alone which forms the
    basic content of the world.

    t Reletion between man & nature: - The idealists believe in the harmonious
    working of nature and man. They regard man as the centre of the universe. The
    65
    materialists reject this theory and give more importance to the physical aspects as
    compared to the mental.

    6) Difference in phitosophy: - The philosophy ofidealist is idealism and thc


    philosophy ofthe materialists is realism. Thee realists, unlike idealists, consider the
    object as having more reality than their ideas.

    7) Dilferent faith in sciences :- The idealists have more faith in the normative
    and social sciences whereas the materialists believe more in the positive or natural
    science such as physics, chemistry Biology etc. These are more acceptable to a
    materialists as compared to logic, Ethics and Aesthetics.

    8) Different in outlook:- The idealists have a spiritual outlook and the outlook
    of materialists is material. The idealists recognize a spiritual element in the man and
    universe where as the materialist consider everything as having a physical aspect.

    Comparison'between idealism and materialism

    Idealism Materialism
    l) The idealists believe in the sugemacy r) The Materialists believe in the
    ofmind, thoughts, or ideas. supremacy ofmatter.
    2) According to idealisb, the elements of 2) The elements ofcreafion according to
    creation are reasorg lhought, values etc. the maerialiSs are matter, motion and
    enerry.
    3) Idealists establish the supremacy of 3) Malerialisb establish me suprcmacy of
    ideas over matter. malter over mind.
    4) The idealists believe in idealism on 4) The materialists believe in realism on
    the content of epistemologL the content of episternologr.
    5) Idealists believe in the harmonious 5) Materialists believe more in the ]

    working of man and nature. physical energr. i


    6) The philosophy ofidealists is idealisrn. 6) The philosophy of materialists is
    rcalisn I

    I
    7) Idealists believe more in the 7) Mdterialists believe more in the I
    teleological aspect of life. deterrninistic aspect oflife. I
    8) Idealists give importance to normative 8) Materialists give importance to the I
    screnoes. positiveornattual science. I
    e) The idealists have a spiriual or.tlook e) The materialists have a material I
    outlook I
    66
    Kinds ofldealism :

    1) Subjective idealismr Subjective idealism denies the existence ofthe extenral


    objects and reduces them to the subjective ideas ofthe finite mind that perceives
    them. The so-called extemal objecg are sensations produced in the minds ofperceivers

    byGod.

    Berkeley is an adovcate ofsubjective idealism. He denies the existence ofthe


    extemal world. The theory ofsubjective idealism is termed subjective in as much as
    the reality depends upon the subjective states bf mind.

    According to Berkeley existence lies in perception, meaning there by that a


    thing exists only.when it is the subject ofperception. His famous statement is 'Esse
    Est percipi'. Ii means existence is perception

    Bcrl,cley held that malter is nothing but a cluster ofqualities; ad all the qualities
    ofmatter both primary and secondary are nothing but subjective states or ideas of
    mind. Berkeley admits tlrc existerce of minds only i.e. finite mind and infinite mind.

    There is no necessary connectio.n between a material object and sensation.


    An object can never be perceived apart from its sensations. The subjectivist holds
    that thrre can be no object or its perception without a knower. Thus only perception

    by mind and the rnind itself is real. The world is a mental world. The sensations
    produced by God are the real ideas and the ideas excited by imagination are less
    vivid & vague. This is the difference between imaginary and real things.

    2) Phenomenatism:- Kant is phenomenalist, who stands midw.ay between


    subjective & objective idealists. For Kant there are three realms. There is the inner
    realm ofsubjective states, which is purely persorial and not the realm ofknowledge.
    Thete is the outer world of ultimate reality, the noumenon, whicy by its very nature is

    unknown and unknowable. Man's contact with ths realim is achieved through the
    67
    sense ofduty or the moral law. There is also the world ofnature or the phenomenal
    world, which is the realm of human knowledge.

    Kant said ttat ltrcr€ is some oliective rEality in the back ofphenorrena knowledge
    results from action upon sensation. We know the real as it appears and
    t.pind's
    never as it is. For this reason Kant's philosophy is usually identified with
    phenomena

    According to Kant, the mind has certain innate ways of working. Form and
    order are thrust on nature by the mind. s9nsory experience fumistres mind its content.

    The mind is active, it fomr the raw sense data into a system of knowledge. Just as a
    potter takes the formless clay and fashions it into one form or another, so the mind
    forms or organizes material ofthe senses. Thus our thoughts regarding the world are
    determined in large part by the s&uctue ofthe mind.

    3) objective ldealism:- objective idealists regard knowledge as deterrrined by the


    nature ofthe world itself, They are idealists in the sense that they interpret the universe

    as an intelligible entity. when ttrcy say ttrat tlrc ultimate naturc ofthe universe is mental,
    they mean thai the universe is orre all embracing order, tlnt its basic nature is mind,
    and that it is an organic wtrole. The begining ofidealistic spoculation in western culfirc
    is often attributed to plato. Plato believed that behind the empirical world there is an
    ideal world offorms or ideas. He believed in the objective reality ofthe highest
    forms,
    e.g. the concept ofman has got more reality than any individual person has.

    Hegel has also propounded one ofthe best knovm systems ofobjective or
    absolute idealism. According to him thought is the essence ofthe universe,
    and naturc
    is whole ofthe mind obiectified. The universe is an rmfolding process of thought.
    The
    world expresses itselfin thinking; our thinking does not determine the nature ofthe
    world. when we think ofthe total world order and the spiritual levels of existencg we

    68
    reality, Hegel sas forth a dynamic
    speak ofthe absolute or God. Instead ofthe static
    concePion of world'

    the existence ofobjective world or


    real-
    The objective ideatists do not deny
    in mind' This belief in meaning
    " ity.The existence inthis context m€ans the exist€nc€
    adinte[igenceinthestructueoftheworldisabasicassrrmptionunderlayingirleal-
    ' isr'.

    E.4 Suggestcd.Reading:-

    Elements ofphilosophy -Dr' Surindo Kumar

    Introductiontophilosophy -Patrick

    69 ..
    IIIEORIESOTRf,ALITY
    Semester-Ist
    Lesson No. l0

    MEANINGA"IYD CIIARACTERISTICS
    OF MATERIALISM

    By Dn Kiron Bakhi
    Strrcturq
    4. I Objectives
    4.2 trfoarctlon
    4.3 . Historical aspect

    4.4. Iftrdsoflvlarerialism
    4.5 Cturaiteristicisoflvlateriatisn
    4.6. Groundsforsupport
    4.7 Criticisrnoflrraterialisn
    '4.8 To sum up
    4.9 Suggestedrcading
    4.1 Objectives
    ',
    .
    . To lorow the reality
    . To knowdiferentviews regardingreality :..

    . To lsrow hisorical perryective


    of materialism
    4'2 rntroduction: Materialisrn is a doctorine ofphilosophy
    which holds that mar-
    ter is the urtimate reality of the
    life and universe. It is * ori'^ nu.*ty.
    There have

    70
    considered matter to be the ultimate surff
    been people at all times and ages who have
    of the universe. They believe in the existente
    ofa mechanical order in the universe'

    the world is govemed by strict


    Prof. Bahm says, 'The materialists hold that

    The materialists do not believe in the existence


    ofany spirit or idea Even the

    mindisalsoconsideredtobeaby-productofmatter.Thematerialistshaveascien.
    capable ofexplaining every
    tific concept ofmatter. They think that science is fully
    govemed by the laws of malerialisn'
    thing in this world. All the actions and things are
    sciences have got certain rules and
    prin-
    Physics, Chemistry, Biologt and many other
    ciples.ellthesecaneasilyexplainthematterunderinvestigation.Inthiswaythere
    remains no need of any divine power or God'
    of any spiritual or divine
    Prof. Titus says, "Materialists deny the. existence
    power."

    ln contas,t to idealism, inarerialism prefers and asserts


    the superiority of ma-

    terialthingsoverideas.Inthemodemtime,materialismhasbecomeverypopular.
    People are following this philosophy not only
    in metaphysics' but also in ethics and

    their daily life.


    have become the dominant notes
    Prof. Mackerzie says. 'Materialism and hedonism
    of modern life"'
    an u:nlimitea materlat entity'
    Modern materialism holds that the unvierse is
    have already existed and will always
    The universe including all matter and energy
    exist
    objective reality
    Karl Marx says, "The world is a hard' tangible' material'
    that man can know."
    mind' Such a doctorine is
    Matetialism holds that nratter existed even bbfore
    which nrle out the existence of
    opposed to all kinds ofidealism or spiritual theories
    The history of materialism is as old as the human
    history'
    matter.

    4.3. HistoricalPersPectivc
    that history of marcrialism
    Ancient Period : It was for the frst time in Creece
    7l
    began. The ancient Greek philosopher,
    Democritus and his master Leucippus
    first advocated the philosophy of riraterialism.
    Democritus believed that body
    was made of a number of material
    elements. According to him, the Chemical
    structure of the different bodies is
    the same. They only differ in their external
    appearance. He did not believe that
    the soul according to him, was made
    there was any purpose ir,h";;;. ;;;
    of atoms which were a rittre more refined
    and smooth than those which went
    in to the building ofother beings ofthings.

    Epicurus, who followed Democritus,


    also advocated a materialistic
    philosophy' His ideas are found
    contained in the poems of the Roman poet,
    Lucretius.

    Older Materialism believed that the


    atoms are eternal and they are in
    motion through empty space. Ends or purposes
    do not exist i" ,"r;;;;;
    freedom' Matter in motion under the
    operation of naturar laws wilr exprain
    world and all that it contains. Democritus the
    emphasized the method of analysis.
    His followers, the Epicureans emphasized,
    the peace ofmind which is the outcome
    of a materialistic worrd view. The term
    'Atomism' has usuary been appried to the
    kind of materialism held by Democritus
    and his followers.

    Thus, we see that the older materialism


    including the earlier forms of the
    modem theory was very dogmatic- It
    felt quite sure that tlie whole world including
    life and mind and human society.and art
    and litersture and human history courd
    be explained as the resurt ofthe redistribution
    ofmatter and motion, or ofatoms
    moving in emtpy space.

    Materialism is usually described as a


    form of monism, reducing all reaiity
    to one single kind of being, namely matter.
    Historically-Greek
    materialism have never
    succeeded in rearizing the idear ofoneness.
    Even the atomists assumed
    two first principles, atoms and motion,
    besides empty space.

    Modem period : In the modem period materialistic


    phlosophies developed
    in Europe' They were formulated and prcsented
    by Thomas Hobbes in England Karr
    Vogg J. Moleschotl L.Buchner were
    other notable materialists of the era-
    Thesc philosophers considered the defintion
    ofmarcrialism as presentcd by

    Newtontobethemostsatisfrctory.Butthisdefintionrraslaterfoundtobeina&guale
    and therefore rcjected. The recent analysis
    of atom has presentcd a new picture of
    philosoplrers hardly 6nds any
    Natue in wtich the matter as e,Qlaired by marcrialistic
    place. It is believed today that we knowloo much
    of matter to be materialists any

    mone.

    4.4. Kinds of Mrterialism


    i
    grcss matter
    l) Gros Mrterielirm : According to this kind ofmaierialism
    isthowhttobeth€ultimaresnffofautherhings.Thesethinkerssrrbscribingtothis
    viewarecrrdenaterialistsrvlrodonotgetirrtothedaailodramificatiorr.Theybelieve
    intheultimaerealityofgross,unrefinedmatter'Ifthereisagythingwhichcanbe
    The old philosophics beliencd lt* there
    callod ultimatc, it is primal' rmformed mxter'
    arefivebasicelemengofwlrichmattetisconsitrrtod.TheseareearttL$"at€r,air'fir€
    and cther.
    the world is
    2) Mechanistic Metcrirlisn : According to this kind of materialism
    physics & mechanics govern the
    governed by stict mechanical laws' The laws of
    aftirs ofthe world-
    consciousncss as a kind of
    Mechanistic materialism inrcrprets mind and
    snrdy ofbehaviour is comidercd
    p\niological behavior- In the Eeld ofphysiologr the
    in nrch a view'
    L U" ,."y i-pon o,. The concept of consciousness is rejented
    is a very important
    3) Dialccticrl Mrterielirm : Dialecticat m*erialism
    Thp dialectical method is a very old
    doctrire of rrcdern times' It is bosed on diatectic'
    consiurents i'e' thcsiq antithcsis and
    mahod ofphilosophy. It is bosed on three basic
    synthesis.

    The thesis is the statement ofthe


    problems or the frcts' The anti-thesis is the
    refers to the combined result of the
    examination of its opposite' The synthesis
    contradictiotrs.

    Man(wastheChiefadvocateofthedialecticalmarcrialism.Hetookup

    73
    dialectical method from plato ahd Hegel.
    He distinguishes between two types
    mdedalism.
    of

    The first is Historical and the second


    is dialectical. Historicar materialism
    states that all events ofhistory are
    All wars and other important
    ultimately governed by rlr" _"jr;;;;.;;
    causes'
    **o *"rra txik place either because
    of money or worhan or iand or some other "r-*
    nateria Oing!.
    -The
    materialisic conception ofhistory is the
    basis of historical materialism.
    The second kind is known as dialectical
    materialism. According to this theory
    mareriarism is guided by the raws ofdialectlc
    rvhe,ein a thesis and and an antithesis
    give rise to a slmthesis.

    5.5 Chrrectcristics of Meterialism-

    fo,owing are the chief features ofmateriarism


    The
    wtrich have dweloped in
    the course ofhistorical progress.

    a) lvlatter as the ulrimqte rcality.


    b) No qualitative difference between
    different bodies.
    c) Ivlatter modified into life.
    d) Devetoped form of matrer is
    min{.
    i) Manroit adercrminim.
    f) Materialistic orplanAion ofthings.
    g) Hedonistic ethics.
    h) Matter, asubstitute forGod.
    i) Things versus ideas.
    j) Superiority of the material over
    the mental.
    ' ' a) Matter rs the ultimetc Reerity :'The materiarists
    berieve that the
    universe is made ofmatter' The
    matter is the basic st,fiorte wo4d. rherc is motion
    in the matter' AII the tiving beings
    and its motion.
    and the things in* ,*.r r* ,,,* of this nutter

    74
    refirse to admit that there
    b) No Quelitative Difrerence : The materialists
    thing and another' According to them'
    all
    is any qualitative difference between one
    and the distinctions that appear are
    owing to matetial atoms'
    tfriogp* -"a" of atoms
    are seeo are quantitatve and not
    qualitative' It would be better
    Whatever distinctions
    proved
    by quantitative difrerence' This is
    to say that qualitative <titrercnce is prodrrce<t
    movements into one another'
    by the conversion ofelectical and mechanical
    Another religious ttreory that
    c) Dweloped form of metter is mind :
    or the soul in the body'
    materialists reject is that mind is a substance l"*tt': hr
    i:
    personality is only rmporary' Everyone
    them the rmity ttra aprpears in the human
    occui due to it'
    UJ ir, i,, *fri"l is made of marcrial substance' All menal activities
    " present a
    :
    e) Mechanism and detbrminism When the materialists free will'
    they rule out the possibility of
    mechanical explanation of man's behaviour
    always detennined by the environment'
    They believe that uihatever man does is
    : Society' according to materialists'
    $ Materialistic erplanetion ofthings
    ismadeofnatue.Thesocialrelationshipisduetophysicalcontactoftlrcpeople.Itis
    only tbrouglr physical instnrrrens that
    all activities in society are performed'
    in the theory of hedonism so
    g) Iledonistic ethics : The materialism believes
    farasmoralityisconcemed.Ifonetriestoavoidpainandseekpleasure,theyargue,
    shouldbe sought'
    iri*rffi;"cal fact and itpoints to tlrc trtnhthat onlypleasure
    its root is physical needs and the
    influence of
    The human relatio*hip gro*" bo"u'"
    on thenr. Even beauty and tr$rr have
    mderialistic explanation according
    enviomment
    to them.
    Generally speaking' materialists arc atrcists'
    h) Metter, a Suboitute for God :
    argue' is the creation of man's
    mind' They say
    They do not believe in God, who, they
    can be done on
    the creation ofthe world' This
    that there is no need for God to explain
    Eratt€r is q€ator' Whatever is
    attributed to God
    the basis of physicaf faws' O"fV ttre
    shotrld be attributed to matter'
    is that it is free from any kind of
    The main characteristic ofthe rnaterialism
    &alisrn
    holds that the things are primary'They
    i) Things Versus ldeas : Iriaterialism
    75
    came fiIst in the scheme of rhi4gs;
    If things are not pi€seot in thc world the
    ideas can
    never be made. Tbe idealisB thilk
    that the ideas arre primry. They consider
    idea to be
    etemal & ever lasting

    . i) Superiority of the materlal over the nentel : Maerialism


    holds that
    matter is superior to mind. Mental proceqses
    are notldig btt tte manifestation ofsome
    materiar forces.The advocates of
    m"t"riaii'srir oirt tLt the mind is nothing
    extcnsion ofmatter. Thus all mental but an
    activites and mentar firnctions arejust
    propeties ofmatrcr' when rratter like the
    becomes highly sophisticatod aad
    refine4 it chmges
    imo rrindand mentat modifications.

    4.6 Groundr for Support : The materialists


    have produced many arguments
    support their theories.The to
    arguments are as follows :
    a) Perception and orperimen!
    b) Realexplanaion :

    Q Onty physt0al phenomena

    e) Consen ation ofenerry


    f) Theory ofevolution

    Let us now consider these arguments


    one by one.
    e)Perception&crperimentionIythematterisperceivedbyusandnotmindor
    God.

    b) Reat explenetion : Materialistic


    expranation is scientific and
    the same marteriaristic principlbi more aceptabie.as
    .r" a
    c) onry physicer phenomena
    "piri."ur. ""r*lr***
    : It has been proved with the help
    in the worrd.

    of science.that
    mental phenomena are the results
    ofphysical activiti", o, O" *tiui; -*
    ;;;:--
    d) Comparative psychology: The
    comparative psychology also
    materialism. The supports
    comparative psychologists trace
    the l,ocatization of all mental
    functions in the brain.
    ' 'l

    e) Consenefion of evergr : Accordingto the scientific principle ofconservation of


    eners/, the quantum of energy does not undergo change..It remains the same in all
    corditions.

    ;, f) Theory of evolution : The modern theory of evolution also believes, as the


    materialists do, that the life has wolved out of matter.

    the theory of materialism.


    , ,., . f,,

    a) Modernphysicsrejectsmaterialism

    b) Psychological and sociat seiences also'rbject it.

    c) The theory ofevolttrion is against it

    ' : e) Perceptiondoesnotsupportmatter

    0 Theprincipfeofconservdionofenerglrefutesmaterialisrfo
    1.

    h) Intellechnllawscannotexplaintheworld.

    D Matterdiffercntfromatoms

    j) Differencebetweenmentd&physicalactivity.

    k) Mechanical lawscannotbe appliedinnryan sphere '-

    )'-

    m) Faithinvalueshitbymaterialism

    e) Modern physics rejects materielism : Accorilingto tfre modernphysics,


    the so catled matter is forrrid ofenergy wtrose nature is still unknown.

    b) The theory of evolution against it : It is found that this very theory condemns
    , thematerialistichpothesisbcause, accordinltothematerialists,thematterisabsolute
    whereas the theory of evolution makes no such absolrtistic claim. -,,
    '
    c) Rejection by psychologicd& rocial schnces : These sciences along with
    philosophical science have now refirod ttre mecianistic orplanration ofpqrchological
    and social phenomena

    O The neterialists differ among thcmselves : Some materialists believe


    that in the beginning ofcreation there were three elements the material atoms, space
    and time. Here also the difference of opiaion is found on the question whether the
    atoms arc active or inactive.

    e) Perception does not support the metter: The materialists do not accept
    the existence of anything which is not perceived. Many philosophers believe that
    matter can not be proved by perception as it is only certain qualities which are
    perceived by the human senses and nothing called matter as such is perceived.

    $ The principle of consenation of energr refutes it : There is difference


    of opinion among the psychologists over the question if the mentar & physical
    processes are one or two. If
    these are considered to be different the principle of
    conservation of energr does not prove to be true, which would refute tlrc
    materialists
    theo.y.

    c) No synthesis between unitSr and muttipricity : when the materialists admit


    that the universe was created by atoms, they place more importance on
    multiplicity
    than uoity. But on the other hand by admitting the atoms to be undivided
    units the
    materialists have been unable to expl"io unity.

    h) Intellectual laws cannot erprain the worrd : The materialists claim that
    rrnivsrse can be sxplained by mechanical and
    mathematical laws. critics argue that
    these two can not explain everything.

    i) Matter different from atoms : Materialists have given a[ the qualities


    of
    God to matter- on the other hand they give the quarities of creation
    to the atoms. So
    their theory is self-contadictory.

    $ Diffcrence between mentar & physicer activities : The characteristics


    ofmind are not formd in matter. while matter can be contolled by mind, mind cannot
    be controlled by mafter.

    k) Mechanical laws cannot be applied in human spheres : The Chief


    78
    characteristic of man is his freedom ofwill. This is the principle which materialism
    cannot explain adequatelY.

    I) Puraose cannot be erplr-rned by materialism: The change in the world has

    . been called by the materialists as iir accident in the mechanical processes. Such an
    argument does not serve the purpose of wolution.

    . m) loss of faith in values : Materialism strikes at the very root of values we


    have long cherished and on which our society and cultu€ is based-

    4.8 To sum up : The philosophy ofmatedalism has a great appea.l to the modem
    man. Infact materialism provides to us readyrr.ade and short cut ways to success and
    enjoyment. It alsoprovides the scientific explanation to things. It goes to the extreme
    ofconsidering matter as the source ofeverything.

    Thus, the maerialiss think that science is fully capable oforplatning ev€rything
    , in this world. Ali the actions and things are govemed by the laws of materialism.

    79
    TIIORIESOFREALITY

    Scmester-1st Lesson No. ll


    Unil{V Phitocophy

    Rcelism : Meaning Kindr and Chief Tencts of Rcrtirm

    Srcturc:
    4.1 Objec'tfircs

    1.2 ltodrction
    4.3 Chidtene8ofRealisrn

    4.4 KirdsofRealism

    4.5 ToSumrp

    4.1 Objectivec
    . To make students aware ofthe meaning ofRealism.
    . To acquaint them with the concept ofobjectivity.
    To help them differentiate between the idealistic and the reaslist
    approach.

    . To know the different kinds ofrealisrn.

    4.2 Introduction or Meening of Redism


    Realism is the theory that holds that the existence ofobjects is real. Both
    realism and objectivism are metaphysical theories conccrned with the existence
    of
    things. In epistemology realism holds that in the process ofknowredge things
    are
    independent ofthe existence and influence ofthe knower. Hrc tIrc main t€n€t
    ofthis
    80
    theory in the epistemological field is that object and its qualities are
    independent

    ofand uninfluenced by the knower and the process ofknowledge'


    For the realist, the world is real. The things and the person along
    with
    qualities and relations are real. The existence ofthis world is in no way dependent
    uponanyknowingmind.Theidealistsontheotherhand,arguetotheeffectthat
    there cannot be any world independent of mind and if a thing or
    quality is to exist
    it must be percieved or known by a mind. Materialism on the other hand holds
    that ultimate reality is material. But realism is different from both ofthese
    theories
    exists
    viz idealism and materialism. The idealists hold that the object is that which
    of the
    for a mind as an idea, the materialist believes in the material construction
    mind but the realists hold that the object is independent of ttre knowing
    mind'
    The realists contend that the object exists outside the mind'

    Realismwasrevivedinmoderntimesttrroughai'eactionagainstabsolute
    into
    idealism. Since it supports common-sense and science so it again came
    ;;;;;;;;;;;r;;," arter a rong dominance oridearism in the re't
    cennry philosoPhical thought-

    Theoutlookoftherealistsismainlypluralistic.Theybelievethatthe.
    than in an
    ultimate reality is vested in the particular objects ofexperience rather
    used by the
    organic whole which has only a secondary existence' The method
    modernrealistsisthecriticalanalysis.Theyregardthesyntheticconstructionof
    philosophicalviewseitherasimpossibleorasfruitless.Therealiaticattitude
    draws its sustenance
    however is not a new one in philosophy' Modem realism
    fromthedifferentformsofancientrealism.ModemRealismhasflourishedmost
    inGreatBritianandAmerica.G.E,MooreandBertrandRussellarethegreat
    leaders and the founders ofthe modern realism in Britain'

    4.3 The Chief Tenets of Realism :

    The following are the chieftenes ofrealism :

    l. Eristence ofobjcctr is independent of knowledge :

    According to the Naive realists dre objects exist ircspective


    ofour knowledge

    81
    ofthem and our thoughts about objects only describe the
    actual qualities of
    objects. Scientilic rearism accepts the existence ofobjects
    independent ofthe
    mind but according to it thoughts concerning the objects are
    based on the
    mind-

    Qualities are inherent in known objects : According to the Neive realist


    the object or its quarities do not sufer by becoining the
    subjects ofknowledgc
    but aecording to the scientific realist this theory does not hold
    t,e for secondary
    qualities.

    Knowledge of objects is direct : According to Orc irlaive realist


    knowledge
    ofthe objects is direct and perceptuar. According to tte scientific
    realism, this .
    is tnre of simple thoughts, for in complex thought knowledge
    is indirect since
    complex thoughts are made rip ofsimple ones.

    Objects arc Common : According to the Naive realists, objeca


    are common
    wldle according to the scientific realists, objects arc commonly
    available only
    for the purposes of primary or elementary thought. Scientific
    realism holds
    that the same object may be experienced differently
    by different individuals.
    Relation between object end thought : Naive realism
    holds that there is a
    relation of exact correspondance between object
    and its thought, but the

    Modtrn realirm is related to epistemologr : Modem realism


    is mainly an
    epistemological doctrine as compared to ancient realism
    which was mainly a
    metap-hysical doctrine.

    7. Modcm realirm supports rcience tnd commonsense :


    The modern r€alism
    supports commoruiense and sciences. It'is against
    any kind of idealistic
    unscientifi c explanation of reality.

    Pluraristic outtook : The outlook ofthe rcdiss is"mainly


    pluraristic. LJltimate
    reality according to them, is vested in the particular
    objecs and not in the
    whole. ,, '
    10. The method: The realists make use of the analytical
    method and not the
    synthetic method.

    10.4 The main types of Realism

    Realism has assumed various forms and all thinkers are not ofthe same opinion
    as to rhe naflre of knowledge and the reality of the extemal world, Some realists hold
    thar in perception vie directly know the extemal things and these things aregur oblecs
    ofperception. Other real.ists are ofthe opinion that we know the external reality
    indirectly through the medium ofideas which are in mind and ideas are about objects
    ofperception. So therc is difference ofopinion among the realists also due to the
    various forms of realism.

    The main types of realisrn are the following :-

    1. Naive or Popular realism: Naive realism is based on the common-sense


    according to which objects are independent ofmind whether they are known
    or not. Objects possess their own qualities and knowledge do€s not affect
    the object. The objects are what they appear to be. They are known $irectly
    and objects are common for all. The naive realists consider this world as an
    aggregate ofmany independent objects. The existence ofthings and their
    qualities does not depend on their being cogrized by any mind' Things exist
    with all their qualities even when no mind thinks or perceives them' Things are
    known through our consciorxrness. our cnnsciousness is like a beam oflight
    which shines through the sense-organs and illuminarcs the world just as it is.

    1. Chief Charactcristics of Naive.Realism

    Objects exist independentty of knowledge of them: Objects do


    not come into existence when they are known since they continue to
    exist even \ ihen no mind is perceiving thern.

    2. Oblects pbssess their own qualities: Each object has its own
    qualities and characteristics the existence ofwhich does not depend
    upon thi knower.
    3. Knowledge does not influence objects: Knowledge ofan object
    or its qualities does not have any influence on either the object or its

    83
    qualities.

    4. The object is what it appears to be: There is no difference between


    the forrn and nature ofthe objecg it is exactly what it appears to us.
    In this way thert is no difference between the reality ofthe object and
    the experience ofit.

    5. Objech are known directly: Nothing intervenes between the object


    and the knowledge of it. They are the subjects ofour experience and
    we experience them for what they are.

    6. Objech are pubtic: The knowledge ofan object is not limited to any
    individual. Many people can have experience and knowledge ofthe
    same object. Therefore, objects and their knowledge both are public.

    II. Neo Realism: Neo-Realism is a novel approach to the platonic theory of


    reqlity. ln this theory it is believed that the total object is not the subject of
    knowledge but its aspects are, and they are independent ofknowledge. The
    quafities ofthe objects are its own and do not affect the objects. An object is
    what it is manifestly seen to be. Knowledge ofthe aspects ofan object is
    dlr'ct while logical entities are universal.

    The following are the chieftenets ofNeo Realism.

    1. Objects lre independent of knowledge: Both Naive-realism and


    Neo-realism are sane with respect to the independence ofknowledge.
    Both ofthenl hold ihat the existence ofthe object is independent of: .
    knowledge. , .

    2. Qualities are part of thc kri-iiwn object: According to both these


    theories all qualities are in ttre object itself, not in the knowledge of
    . them. They do not make any distinction between primary and
    secondary qualities.

    3. Nature ofobject is not influenced by knowledge ofit: Objects


    and their qualities exist even when there is no consciousness to take
    cognizance ofthern.
    andtheNeo realisrn
    4. Obiects are what they appear to bc: BothNaive
    and its conception'
    I *cqtttratthere isno diffe'lencebetweenthe object
    as real as the object itself'
    that all impressions ofthe object ale
    are ofthe opinionthat
    5. Obiects are known directly: The neo-realists
    not complete objects but some of
    '',' the subjects ofour perceptions are
    perceptions are known directly'
    their aspecs which are known in our
    realism or representationisms'
    III. Scientific Reatism : The doctrine ofscientific
    states that mind never perceives
    anything
    introduced by Descartes and locke
    extemal to itself' Mind can perceive
    only its own ideas - its own states and
    a beam ofliglrt itluminating
    extemal
    processes. Consciousness instead ofbeing
    which extemal things are represented'
    ' ,"ulity is like a photographic plate on
    primary an<t secondary' Primary qualities
    There are two types oiqualities viz'
    whereas the secondary qualities like
    are not affected by the state of mind
    The primary quatities belong to the
    taste, smell etc are affected by the mind'
    the
    secondary qualities depend upon
    objects so they are objective whereas
    bY the mind'
    PercePion of objects
    because it asserts that
    This theory oflocke is known as Representationalism
    do not know extemal things but only
    their representations or copies'
    we
    of Representationalism'
    The following are the characteristics

    Objects exist independently of knowtedge:


    The
    1.
    all other realiss that objects
    Representationalists sturc this beliefwith
    ofthem but they differ in as
    exist independently ofthe knowledge
    muchasthateventhoughideasarearousedbyobjectstheydepend
    uPonthe mind'
    upon the knower:
    2, Primary qualities ofthe obiect do not dcpend
    solidity etc' They are not
    Primary qualities are size' shape' len6h'
    dependent upon the knower' Only the secondary qualities like touch'
    taste, smell etc' are dependent on the
    knower'

    not alfected by the ideas:


    3. Objects ind its primary qualities are
    which are the images of
    Mind does not conjure up primary ideas
    primary qualities. So it does not even
    modi$ the impressions thrown
    up by the object and its primary qualities.

    4. Objects arewhat they appear to be primary


    in idea but not what
    they appeer to be in secondary
    ideas: Locke differs Iiom the Naive
    realists when he believes that onty
    primary iaeas are the symbols of
    the object and not the secondary
    ideas.
    5. Knowledge of real objects in indirect
    : According to Locke we
    can never know the real nature
    of an object because our knowledge
    of it is indirect. We know the object
    through simple ideas which are
    rcpresentations ofit.
    6. Primary ideas are public: Since
    &e primary qualities are objective
    so the p_rimary ideas are
    public. On the other hand secondary
    qualities
    are dependent upon the mind
    so the ideas that are formed of
    the
    secondary qualities are not public
    and objective.
    Critical Realism: The Critical Realism
    believe that the existence of objects
    does not depend upon knowledge
    in any way. The object is directly known.
    Critical realism does not hold the
    object of knowl"ir" u, n ir.""n
    ro U..
    object becomes object ofknowledge
    ,lvlrcnttre it is innrincea Uy knowledge.
    Knowledge can be direct as well
    as indirect. The relatioo b"t
    and the known is not direct but
    r""n tt k o*,
    takes place through the medium "
    ofthought
    which is the subject matter ofknowledge.
    Ditrerenip*pf" fr"* Am"*r,
    knowledge ofan identical object. "*
    The following are the characteristics
    ofthe critical realism. .
    1' objects are independent ofknowredge:
    criticar realists, like a[
    other realists believes that the objects
    known are independent ofthe
    knowledge ofthem. The objects
    keep on Jmout even being
    known "*i.Urg
    2. Qualities arr independent of knowledge : According
    to the critical
    rcalists, the qualities ofthe objects
    arc independent ofthe knowledge
    ofthem.
    independent of
    3. According to critical realism although objects are
    creates the object
    knowledge and the knower, it is knowledge which
    as a subject of knowledge'
    According to
    4. The critical realists believe that all knowledge is iiiitirect.
    object but the
    them knowledge has reference to the directly perceived
    object is not its cause.
    the
    . 5. Critical realists hold that thoughts exist between the knower and
    ', known.

    87
    SYMBOLICLOGIC
    Semester-1st
    Lesson No. 12
    Unit-V gil*opnV
    5.1 Definition, Nature and Scope of Logic

    By Dr. P. P.Singh '


    Strucfure:

    5.1. Objectives
    5.2. Intnoduction
    5.3. Definition oflogic
    5.4. Nature of Logic
    5.5. Scope oflogic
    5.6. To sum up
    5.7. Suggested Reading
    5.8. E<ercise
    5.1. Objectives
    r To enable the studentsto understand what logic is.
    o To give them an understanding ofthe methods of logicar inference,
    troth
    inductive and deductive.

    o To enable the students to develop a critical attitude


    towards assumptions and
    presrppositions of logic.

    o To assist the students to improve their own powers


    ofcogent reasoning.
    r To make the stdents familiar with the subject - maner wittr which logic
    dears.

    88
    5.2. Intmduction
    should not be confused with
    Philosophy is not a sheer speculative activity and
    it. Philosophy is infact based on good reasoning'
    Ingic as the science ofreasoning
    can be correctly derived from
    is thc study of whether or not a putative conclusion
    a given set of Premises.

    The word 'Logic' is derived from the Greek word logos' which means
    of correct reasoning' which
    thought, reason or discourse. It is thus the pursuit
    seekstoinvestigateandestablishthecriteriaofvalidinferenceanddemonstration.
    ofinference; it is the process ofpassing from certain
    Reasoning is the process
    another truth distinct from
    propositions already known or assumed to be true' to
    or argument which infers one
    ihem but following from them' It is a discourse
    propositions having some
    proposition from another, or from a group of other
    is expressed in language' it is
    common elements between them ' When inference
    called an argument.
    These principles are rules
    However, reasoning is guided by certain principles'
    ofinferenceorformsofargumentswhichtelluswhenwearereasoningcorrectly
    rules' In this sense' logic is the
    i.e following the rules or incorrectly breaking the
    It is the study ofthe principles
    study ofthe structure and principles ofreasoning'
    of some ofthe
    governing valid argument. In other words, logic is an examination
    an
    sound arguments from unsound ones and
    lenera plnciptes for distinguishing
    endeavour to pick out some ofthe commonest
    kinds oferror in reasoning' Logic
    of Thought' It is the science of
    may also be defined as the science ofthe Laws
    in order that they may be valid'
    thcprinciples to which thoughts must conform
    Sometimes, logic is defined as the science
    ofthe principles and rules ofvalid
    inference.ItisconcernedwithwhetherthepremisesofagivenargunentwalTant
    acceptance of the conclusion'

    Some ofthe well known definitions oflogic are:

    1. Aldrich defines logic as " The art ofreasoning"'


    and defines logic as " The
    2. Whately amends the definition given by Aldrich
    89
    art and science ofreasoning".

    3. In the words of Thomas, ..Logic is the science of the Laws


    of thought,,.
    4' Arnaurd defines rogic as " fiie science ofthe understanding in
    the pursuit
    . ofTruth".
    5.4. Nature of Lgqic" _

    Defining logic as the science ofreasoning provides only


    a generar indication
    of its nature. Indeed the nat,re oflogic can be
    stdied under the fo,owing headings.
    r' Logic normative science: A normative science is concerned
    es a
    with the
    norms and values rather than with facts. It deals
    with things as they ozgftf
    to De rather than as they are. Logic is a
    normative science, because it deals
    with thoughts and reasoning not as they are but
    as they ought to be. Logic
    sets before itselfthe ideal ofrruth, and
    seeks to know the conditions which
    our thoughts must fulfill in order to attain
    the ideal of Truth. Moreover, logic
    is not concemed with the psychological process
    ofreasoning.
    II. Logic as aformal Science : Modern logic aims merely
    at formal Truth.
    It i:; mostly concerned with the forms of thought i.e. with
    the manndi of
    our thinking irrespective ofthe particular
    objects about *hi"h ;;;;
    thinking; In rogicar thinking, we are not concerned
    with the question
    whether the premises are true as a matter
    of fact, we only deal with the
    question whether the conclusion corre,ctry
    folrows from the premises or not.
    The validity ofan argument in logic is
    determined not by the content of
    the argumbnt butby its
    form.
    III. Logic as a Science and an Art. Logic is both
    a science and an art. A
    science teaches us to know, and an art
    teaches us to do. Logic is science
    in so faras it gives the student an understanding
    of the nature of the
    principles an,t methods oflogical inference,
    and logic is an art because it
    assists the student to improve his own powers
    ofcogent reasoning so that
    he may be able to pick out some of the
    common-est kinds of error in
    reasoning. In this way, logic has a theoreticar
    as we as a practical side.

    90
    been described as the
    w. Logic as the science of sciences: Logic has indeed
    scie,lrce of sciences (Scientia Scientianrm),
    becagse wtrile the different sciences

    deat with different departments of the world,


    knowledge of the fundamen6l laws
    to all ofthem' Every
    of valid thought with which logic deals is indispensable
    science must confomr to the ganeral laws of
    correct thinking with wtrich logic

    isconcerned.Logicisthusthebasisofallthesciences.

    Logrc is a deductive as well as an Inductive science:


    togic as the science
    procedure'
    of reasoning includes both the deductive and the inductive
    to establish the truth of
    Deduction is a method of reasoning which aims
    Induction is
    propositions. It is a method of format proof or demonstration'
    as the method of arriving at
    also a method of reasoning. It may be defined
    on the basis of factual
    general conclusions of varying degrees of probabitity
    evidence.Itisgenerallydesignatedasthemethodofdiscovery.

    91
    SYMBOLICIOGIC
    Semester-lst
    Llson No.13
    Unit-V
    Philosophy
    :

    5.2 Scope of logic:


    In its broadest sense logic is the study of the structure
    and principles of
    reasoning or of sound argument. rwithin
    the study of reasoning which aimsto
    establish the truth of Propositions, the major
    distinction is between deductive and
    inductive methods. of reasoning.
    Deduction is a method of formal r:roof or demonstration.
    In this process of
    reasoning we first lay down certain statements
    which we know orpresume as true
    (such statements are calred premises)
    and then infer or deduce some new
    propositions from the given ones which
    functions as conclusion of our argument.
    Indeed, a i{eductive argument or inference,
    is one in which the conclusion follows
    necessarily from the premises. And if the premises
    are true in a valid deductive
    inference, then the conclusion will also
    be necessarily true. It is therefore
    contradictory in a deductive inference or argument
    to assert the prqmises and
    deny the conclusion followed by them. It
    is in deduction ttrat *e ml;;;"_
    the premises to the conclusion, or we may
    say that the concrusion folrows from
    the premises or that we infer the conclusion from
    the premises, or that the
    premises imply the conclusion. There
    is a certain relation of implication between
    the premises and the conclusion. Deductive
    method has somewhat the characteristic
    of syllogistic reasoning. It is sometimes defined
    as the inference from general
    premises to a particular conclusion by
    means of a syllogism. An example of it
    is hereunder.

    All men are mortal


    Socrates is a man
    Therefore, Socrates is mortal

    92
    In a deductive argument the conclusion necessarily follows from
    the

    premises. This means -that if thc pfdmises are true, the conclusion must
    be que '

    Induction is also a-mcihpd of reasoning' It is usually contrasted {vith


    general conclusion of
    deduction. It may be defrned as the method ofarriving at
    is generally
    varying degrees of probability on the basis of factual evidence' It
    aesignatea as the method of discovery. Induction may also be
    described as that
    process ofreasoning by means ofwhich we derive the premises ofan
    argument'
    particular
    It usually consists of some form of generalization from a number of
    as the inference from
    instances to a universal proposition. It is scimetimes defined
    particular premises to a general conclusion' Indrictive reasoning starts
    with
    pa*iculars and ends with generalizations regarding those particulars. it irever'gives
    us a conclusion as certain as the premises. Itg conclusions are
    merely probable','
    An example ofit is hereunder:
    This is a crow and is black
    That is a crow and is black
    .. That is crow and is black
    3r.

    Therefore, all crows are black'


    be true if
    lnductive argument does not guarantee that the conclusion must
    evidence that shows
    the premises are true. Instead, inductive argument provides
    to accept the
    merely that the conclusion is probably trui or that it is reasonable
    conclusion on the basis ofthe evidence'
    Logic has alsir been defined as the icience of the valid thought'
    It is concerned
    with two aspects ofthought, vjz.i
    (D Processesofthinking
    G) Products of thinking
    (r) Processcs of thinking: The processes of thinking are Conception,
    Judgement and Reasoning.
    (ii) Products of Thinking:
    when
    The products of thinking are terms, propositions and arguments
    expressed in language. tngic deals both with the processes and
    with the products
    ofthinking.

    93
    ,both Besides the above, togic investigatesthe nature ofTruth. It is concerned
    with Formal and Material Truth. Formal truth means free
    from self _
    corfradiction anongst thoughts themselves. lvrarcrial tuth
    means correspondence
    of thought.wi& things of the actual world. Formal tngic aims
    merely at formal
    truth- It includes all forms ofdeductive reasoning. lv{atcrial
    Logic aims asl rnet€1,
    at formal truth but also at material tntrrr It includes
    a[ fonns ofinductivereasoning.
    Meaning and rules of syllogism
    The scope oflogic hns therefore been classified into inductive
    and deductive
    logic' Inductive logic includes fiudan€ntal laws ofthough!
    tlpes of propositions,
    definition, classifrcation, formation ofpropositions and fauacies
    incidental to
    inductive reasoni4g. Deduction logic inchdes hwotbesis, orplanatiorq
    classification,
    a.minatisa atrd stlrcr such processes. Thus all these falls within the
    scope oftogic.
    13.6 To Eum up :
    logic is the branch of.philosophy that examines the nature of
    argument,
    focusing on the principles ofvalid reasoning, the structure ofpropositions
    and
    the methods and vatidity of deduction.More specifically, logic is
    coacemed with
    arguments: their qpes and stuctu€s; the relationships among
    the propositions
    within the arguments and the basic principles governiag valid argument.
    13.7. Suggestcd Reeding
    l. Textbook of Deductive Logic By Bhola Nath Roy
    2. Iogic and its Limits By Patrick Shaw
    3. Logic: A very short Introduction By Graham Priest
    4. Introduction to Logic By Irving M Copi and Carl
    Cohen
    5. An Introduction to Logic and By M.Cohen and E.Nagel
    Scientific Method
    13.8 Ercrcisc(Anrwer theeuestions)
    l. Define Logic and discuss its nature.
    2. Logic is the science ofreasoning. Explain.
    3. What is meant by saying that Logic is a Normative science? Explain frrlly
    the nature of logic as a science.
    4. Discuss the scope and subject matter oflogic.

    94
    SYMBOIICIIrcrc

    Semester-1st Lesson No.l3

    Utrit-V PhilorophY

    53 MbJilng end rulcs of rYllogism

    Structue
    5.1 Objective
    5.2Introduction
    5.3 Meaning of categorical sy'logism
    syltogism
    5.4 Rules ofcategorical
    r.
    5.5 Suggested readings ,
    . . ,..,,'. .

    5.1 Objectives
    ' To acquaint students with the meaning of syllogism'
    ' To make them aware of the two kinds of syllogism'
    .Toenablethemtounderstandthestructureofcategoricalsyllogism.
    ' To make them familiar.with rules of categorical syllogism'

    5.2 Introduction:

    SyllogismisthemostimportantPartofAristotle'slogic.Itisakindofmediate
    two kinds
    inference in which conclusion follows &onilwo premises' There are
    of syllogism, viz: conditional and unco[ditional'
    Therearetwodivisionsofconditionalsyllogism:mixedandpure.lnthis
    topic,weshallconfineourselvestounconditionalorcategoricalsyllogispo'

    5.3 Meaning of categorical syllogism:


    A categorical syllogism is a deductive argum€nt consisting of three
    categorical propositions which contain exactly three tefuiis, each of
    which occurs

    95
    in.exactly two of the constituent propositions.

    Syllogism consists oftwo premises and a conclusion.


    Thus, we have three
    propositions and only three terms.

    syllogism:
    Thc structure ofcategorical
    e
    No heroes are cowards
    g
    Some soldiers are cowards

    Therefore some soldiers are not heroes.

    A term which is common to the premises (cowards), is called


    middle (M);
    Predicate ofthe conclusion (heroes) is called major (p) and
    subject ofthe
    conclusion (soldiers) is called minor (s).while major has
    maximum extension,
    minor has minimum extension.

    The middle term is so called because its extension varies


    between the rimits
    set by minor and major- The premise in which major
    occurs is called major premise
    & the premise in which minor occurs is called minor premise.

    In a standard-form syllogism, the major premise is stated


    first, the minor
    premise second, & the conclusion last.In the syllogism
    stated above,the major
    premise is No heroes are cowards,and the minor pemise
    is some sordiers are
    cowards.

    ' The mosd efs srqndard-form syllogism is determined


    by the fonns ofthe
    standard-form categorical propositions it contains.

    It is represented by three letters, the first ofwhich names


    the form ofthe
    syllogism's major premise, the second that ofthe minor premise
    & the third that
    ofthe conclusion.

    Consider the following sllogisms:-


    . AII great scientists arecollege graduates
    Some professional athletes are college graduates.
    . Therefore some professional athletes
    are great scientists.

    96
    All artists are egoists.
    Some artists are Paupers.
    Therefore somE paupers are egoists
    are of different forms' The
    Both the syllogisms'are of mood AII but they
    rl i I Grence in their forms can be brought
    out by displaying their logical skeletons,
    by P' and the middle terms
    abbreviating the minor terms by S, the major terms
    are:
    by M..The skeletons oi forms of these two syllogisms

    All P is M. All M is P.
    Some S is M.
    .'. Some S is P. .'. Some S !s P

    premises'
    In the the middle term is the predicate term ofboth
    frst syllogism
    term of both the premises' These
    while in the second the middle rcrm is the subject
    is partially described by
    examples show that although the form of a syllogism
    moods may differ in the forms'
    stating its mood, syllogisms having the same
    terms'
    dbpending upon the relative positions oftheir middle
    by stating its mood
    The form of a syllogism may be completely described
    position of the middle term in the
    and figure,. where the figure indicates the
    may have
    pr"-i."r. There are four possible diffe'n:nt figures that-syllogisms
    iepending upon the different possible positions
    ofthe middle rcrm

    5,4 Rulcs of cetegoricel syllogism:'


    I Rules of structure:
    propositions:-
    L Syllogism must contain three, and only three
    one conclusion' Therefore
    Syllogism must consist of two premises &
    together they make up for three propositions'
    2. Syllogism must consist of three terms only:-
    three proposition consist
    A proposition consists of two terms' However'
    of only three terms because each term occurs twice'
    is no middle term' a term common
    Suppose that there are four terms' Then there

    97
    to two premises. In such a
    case the violation ofrule results in a fa,acy called fa,acy
    of four terms. Such a fallacy of
    is never committea knowingly
    because knowing
    fully well the fixed number of terms,
    we do not choose 4 terms.
    It happens when an ambiguous word
    is used in two different senses on
    different occasions. Then there are two
    really 4 ,;,;;,3 terms.
    If an ambiguous word takes.the place
    of middle term, then the fallacy
    is known as fallacy ofAmbiguous committed
    middle.
    Es
    All charged particles are electrons
    Atmosphere in the college is
    charged
    Therefore atmosphere in the college
    is an electron.
    The word charged is ambiguous.
    The conclusion (moral) is that
    all sentences in arguments must
    be unambiguous.
    II Rules of distribution of terms:_
    I ' Middre term must be distributed
    at least once in the premises.
    is violated, then the argument If this rure
    commis the falracy of undistributed
    middre.
    Es
    All circlesare geometrical fignes
    All squares are geornetrical figures
    Therefore all circles are squares.
    2' A terrn which is undistributed
    in the premise must rernain undistributed
    the concrusion' Howevere, it in
    is not necessary thutu i".-,
    the premise, must be distributed
    *rri.r, is distributed in
    in the conclusion.
    If the major term violates this rure,
    then the argument commits the
    illicit major' when the minor term viorares fallacy of
    ,rri. -t", farlacy of ilricit minor
    committed. is

    Fallacy of illicit major:


    All philosophers are thinkers
    No ordinary men are philosophers
    Therefore no ordinary men are thinkers.
    Fallacy of illicit minor:

    98
    All aquatic creatures are fistl
    All aquatic creatures swims.
    Therefore all those which swim are frsh.. .

    III Rules of Quality:


    l. No conclusion can be drawn from two negative premiSes. It means that
    at'least one premise must be affirmative.
    2. are affirmative the conclusion cannot be negative.
    If both premises It
    means that a negative conclusion is possible only when premise is negative.

    IV Rules bf Quantity:
    I . No conclusion can be &awn if both premises are particular. It means that
    -ti,
    at least one premise must be universal.
    I|one premise is particular then the conclusion must be particular only.
    2.
    It means that universal conclusion is possible only when both premises are
    universal.
    ofvalid categorical syllogism; Four ofthem conc€rn
    These are the eight nrles
    the terms and four of them concem the propositions.

    5.5 Suggested readings:


    Introduction to logic by lrving M. Copi and Carl Cohan
    An Introduction to logic and scientific method by Cohen and Nagel
    Symbolic Logic by Irving M. CoPi
    Textbook ofDeductive Logic by BholaNath Roy

    99
    SYMBOLICL(rcIC

    Semerter-1st Lesson No. 14

    Argument Forms and Truth Tables


    ' By Dr p. p. Singh
    Structure
    5.1. Objectives.
    5.2. lntoduction.
    5.3. Statements and their truth values. .
    5.4. Truth-FunctionalConnectives.
    5.5. Argument Forms.
    5.6. Validity and Invalidity ofArgument Forms.
    5.7. Construction ofTruth Table.
    . Testing Arguqents on Truth Tables.
    5.8

    5.9. SuggestedReading. ,

    5.10. Exercise.
    5.1 Objectives
    . To enable the students ti; understand the use of symbols in logic.
    ' To enable them to define both argumentfor-m.s in general and the specific
    form ofa given argument.
    , To enable them to know the purpose and importance of.Truth Tables.
    ' To'teach them how to construct Truth Tables correctly according to the
    defi nition of Truth-Functional connectives.
    ' To acquaint the. with the techniques fortesting arguments on Truth rables.
    ' To teach them how to dercnnine the validity or invalidity of argument fomrs
    by using Truth Tables.

    100
    15.2 Introduction
    any other natural language oft:i
    Arguments presented in English in or ."t"
    i the peculiarity ofthe language
    difficult to analyze and appraise because of( ) used'
    and equivocal nature of the words
    in which they are presentetl, (ii) vague
    metaphorsand idioms
    (iii) the ambiguity of their construction' (iv) &e confirsing
    emotive significahce they
    J"y *y *rrtuin and (v) the distaction due to whatever
    . may express. To avoid these difficulties' logicians
    construct an artifiLial symbolic
    and statements can be
    f uol*g", t"" tom
    linguistic defects' in which arguments
    fonnulated.
    (Symbols) is not [rebuliar to modern
    The use of special logical notation
    his own wbrk'
    togi".;rirtotle also used variables to facilitate
    help us to exhibit with greater clarity
    The special symbols of modern logic
    that
    and arguments' Modem logicians think
    the logical structures ofpropositions
    transitions in reasoning almost mechanically
    by the aid of Symbolism we can make
    by the eye, which otherwise would call
    into play the higher faculties ofthe brain'

    15.3. Statements end their Truth-Valucs'


    general categoriel simde agf
    statements can be divided into two
    All
    does not contain any other statement
    compound. A s imple statement is one that
    is honest' is a simple statement' A
    as a component part. For example, "Ram
    statement is, on the other hand' one
    that does contain another
    "o^pound
    statemeffsltacomponentpart'Forexample''RacrishonestandRamisintelligent"
    two simple statements as components'
    is a compound statement, for it cotrtains

    we san every statement has


    Every statement is either true or false' Therefore'
    statement is true and the truth value
    of
    a truth-value . The truth value of a true
    for 'truth' is 'T' and the shorthand for
    a false statcment is false' The shorthand
    I instead ofT and O instead ofF'
    'false'is 'F'. Some logicians use the Cymbol
    can be repnisented on a Truth Table
    The two possible Truth values of a statement
    as follows:
    F
    T
    101
    15.4 Truth - tr unctional Connectives
    A truth-f,nctional connective is
    a rogical connective within
    a tr'th functionalry
    compound proposition It is also
    known as *rrt""tia *ro""rive.
    In the propositional
    calc.l.s five tut trniqur oornectives
    rr" or"on t i-pont L. Theseare: .nof,.and,
    .ol "ftY'&
    compoud
    :trand onty if . rhey are desigrrcd to jotifii*," **o . *"
    staterrents. Each has a syubol:
    I . : The syrnbol ofthe negatiop is ..-,,
    I\Lesation
    called a .turl,, or a..tilde.,
    which means .not', .it is nor th"
    by asserting its "r""
    thlt ...., *
    ,"r, ,ie truth ofa statement
    negati".
    ela false statement is true. Thus ._ p,
    P is true" This fact can be presented
    i, *"m; false and false when
    by me.,,. of a Truth Table:
    P -p
    Tr
    2. Coniunction

    y*tol of the conjunction is .. . , Called a..dot,,, which mgans (and,.


    ^ .Th"
    conjunction is a tlpe of compound statement.
    to conjoiinsi*o.statenienti tom"t".u -ft logic we use.. ,
    In symboric
    ,logf" ,t t"_"oi. u, *n"r" p _a q
    any two statements whatever, ,their
    conjunctioo i, *ritt"n p . q . "."
    The two
    component statements so combined
    are called .tonjuncts,,.

    ::1"":.:i::lly,* offi
    :r,*: statemenrs is detennined entirery
    ," the truth values of its two conjunco.
    by
    "*,ff
    are true; otherwise it is false.
    orh.. rrord., plGif
    and q is true; otherwise -Io
    and only ifp is true
    it is false.
    ' A conjunction
    is a auth_functional compouilstateinent,
    and the symbol (.
    dot is a &uth- functional connective.
    Ol"* _y *o**L"Ots, p ant q, there are)
    just four possible sets of tnrthvalues they
    Lr". n ;;four
    possible
    thetuth value ofthe conjunctioo io "* U"
    *
    cases and
    roffo*",
    In case p is true and q is true,"*i, "*friiii*
    p . q is true.
    In case p is true and q is falsc, p q
    . is false.

    lo2
    In case p is false and q is true, p . q is false'
    In case p is false and q is false, p . q is false'
    Representing the truth value " true" and " false" by the Capital letters
    . T - and .
    F " respectively, the way in which the tnrth value of a conjunction
    is determined by the truth values of its conjuncts can be displayed more clearly
    by means of a Truth Table as follows:
    p.q

    T T T

    T F F

    F T F

    F F F

    As shown by the truth table defining the "dot" ( ' ) symbol, a conjunction
    is true if and only if both of its conjuncts are true'
    3. Disiunction
    The symbol of the disjunction is " v " called a wedge( or a vee )' which
    means or " Disjunction is a type of compound statement. In symbolic
    .. logic
    weuse'v'toformthedisjunctionoftwostatements'Thedisjunctionof
    any two statement p and q is thus written as " p v q "' The two component
    * disjuncts "'
    statements so combined are called
    The Truth value of the disj unction of two statements is determined
    entirely
    by the truthvalue of its two disjuncts. The disiunction of two statements is true

    . the disjunction is false. In other words, p v q is true if and only ifp is true
    or q is true or both are true, otherwise it is false'
    The symbol " v " is a truth- functional connective, and is defined by the
    followingTruthTable:

    103

    .!
    T T T
    T F T
    F T T
    F F F
    As shown by the Truth Table defining the ..wedge,, (v)
    symbol, a disjunction
    is true if at least one of its disjuncts is true.
    4. Imolication
    The symbol of Implication is .. ,' called
    f, a..horseshoe,,, which means
    "If' ' ' then' . . " where two statements are combined by placing the
    word . if before
    the first statement and inserting the word 'then'
    between them, the resulting
    compound statement is a conditional. also called
    a hmotheticai or an
    'imolicationl. In symbolic logic, we use ..3,,to gorro f.orn *o
    ,*Irn"*" u
    conditional statement. Thus where p and q are any two
    statements whatever, their
    implication is written as p 3 q. In a conditional, the componetrt
    statemirnt that
    follows the 'if is calred the 'antecedent' and the component
    statement that
    follows the 'then' is the'tonsequent'. For exampre,
    'ifthere are crouds, then ttrere
    will be rain" is a conditional statement or imprication in
    which .there are clouds,
    is the antecedent and .there
    will be rain, is the consequent.
    The truth value of the implication is determined
    by the truth values of its
    antecedent and the consequent.

    otherwise it is true. In other words, p 3 q is false if p is true and q is false,


    otherwise it is true.
    The implication symbol (
    3 ) is a truth-fimctional connective like the symbols
    ofconjunction and disjunction. As such, it is defined
    by the Truth Table.
    pf,q

    T T T
    104
    T F F

    F T T
    F F T

    i As defined by the truth table, the horsestroe syrtbol " X " have the fotlowing
    is true; qgd'
    features: that a false antecedent materially implies a true consequent
    is also true'
    that a false antecedent materially iniplies a false consequent
    5. EquivelenccorMaterial'E{uivalencc
    Thesymbotofequivalenceis.?,called..threebars',whichmeans.ifand
    and only if'to obtain
    only if', sometimes written as 'iff. We use the words 'if
    from two statements t biconditional statement and the two
    statements
    members of the
    connected by 'if and only if' are called the left and rieht
    tnre if and only if its two
    equivalence. A biconditional statement (equivalence) is
    members are either both true and both false' In other wolds'
    whentrey haye the
    same truth value . P ? Q' for example, is true if and only
    if the iruth value of
    P and Q are both true or both false.
    is defined by the
    Being a truth - functional connective, the tbree$ar symbol
    following Truth Table:
    p=q

    T T T
    T F F

    F T F

    F F
    when they have the
    Thus two statements are said to be materislly equivalent
    same truth value, i.e. when they are eithcr both
    true or both false' And to say
    that they materially imply
    that two staternents are materially equivalent is to say
    each other, as is verified by the truth table'
    rf,hich deductive
    Thus there are four truths - firnitional connectives upon
    symbolized by the dot;
    argument commonly depends. These are conjunction'
    by the horreshoc
    Oisjunction, symUotized by the wcdgc; implicatioru symbolizcd
    and Equivalence, symbolized by the thrce berc'
    105
    15.5 Argument f,'orms
    To analyze forms ofargument, we need some method of symbolizing
    argumer rr

    forms themselves. In order to subStitute atry statement (compound


    as well as simple) whicir constiturcs an arg,rnen! in its argument
    form we use small,
    or lowercase, letters from the middle part of the alphabet p,q
    ,r,s... as statement
    variables. Thus a statdmeiii viiriable is simply a letter for which,
    or in place or.
    which, a statement may be substituted. To avoid any confirsion, the
    same statement
    is substituted for the same statement variable throughout an argument.
    An argument forrr may be defined as any aray of symbols containing
    statement variables, but no statements, such that when statements
    :re substituted
    'for the stat€ment
    variabres, the result is an argument. And any argument
    that results
    from the substifution of statements for statement variables in an
    argument form is
    called a substitution instance of that argument form.
    15.6 Velidity rnd Invalidity ofArgument Forms.
    The terms 'valid, and .invalid, can apply not only to arguments but also to
    argument forms."we may define the terrns 'valicl' and .invalid'
    as applied to
    argument forms as follows:

    An argument form is valid if and only if it has n o substitution


    instancas with
    tue premises and a false concrusion. on the other hand, an arg,ment fonh
    is invalid
    when it has at ieast oae substitution instance with true premises
    and a false
    conclusion
    15.7 Construction ofTruth Table
    The construction oftruth tables is essentialy a mechanical task. rn using them
    to determine the validity or the invatidity of an argument form,'it
    i, i-portait trr"t
    the Truth rable first be consbuctcd correctly. To
    construct the truth tabre correctly
    there must be a guide column for each statement variable
    p, q, r, etc in the argument
    form. The array must exhibit all the possible combinations
    of the truth and falsity
    ofall these variablcs, so there must be a number ofhorizontar rows
    sufficient
    to do this: 'Two rows if there is only one variable, four rows
    if there are two
    variables, eight rows ifthere are three variables, and
    so on. And there must be
    additional vertical corumns for each. of the premises and
    for the concrusion.
    106
    It then requires a careful counting and the careful placement of T's and F's in
    the appropriate columns, all governed by the definition of the truth-functional
    connectives symbolized by the dot, curl, wedge andhorseshoe . Asfor example,
    we construct the following truttr table to determine the invalidity of the argument
    f fonrl:
    pcq
    q

    ..p

    p q pcq
    T T T
    T F F

    F T T
    F F T
    ofthis table represents a whole class of substitution instances. The
    Each row
    the
    T,s and F,s in the two initial or guide columns represent the truth values of
    We fill in the
    statements substituted for the variables p and q in the argument forrr.
    thirdcolumnbyrefeningbackto theinitial orguidecolurnns andthe definitionof
    *premises" of the
    the horseshoe symbol. The third column heading is the first
    argument fonn, the second column is the second "premises" andthe first
    column
    is the ..conclusion . Thus the second and the third columns of the tnrth
    table
    the conclusion'
    represent the premises, while the first (leftrrost) column represe,lrts
    a.
    And we find that in the third row there are T's under both the premises and
    r!

    F gndertheconclusion, whichindicatesthatthete isat leastone substitrfioninstance


    row suffices
    of this argument form tlrat has tnre premises and a frlse conclusion. This
    to establish that tlre argument form is invalid'
    15.E Testing Arguments on Truth Table
    To determine the vatidity or invalidity of an argrrment fonn, we must
    examine

    all possibl e substitution instances of it to see if any one of them has true
    t07
    premises and a false conclusion. Any argument form, of course, has an infinite
    number of substitution instances, but we need not worry about having to examinc
    them one at a time. Our concern is only with the truth or falsehood of their
    premises and conclusions. We need consider only the tnrth values oftheir premises
    and conclusions.
    !
    Once the Truth Table haibeen constructed and the completed array is before
    us, it is essential lo readiicorrectly, i.e., to use it correctly to make the appraisal
    of the argument form in question. We must note carefully which columns are those
    representing the premises of the argument being tested, and which colump
    represents the conclusion ofthat argument. It is possible for the premises and the
    conclusion to appear in any order at the top of the Truth Table depending upon
    ,
    which argument form we are testing . Thpir position to the right or to the left is
    not significant. The thing that matters is'that we must understand which column
    represents what, and we must undbrstand what we are in search of. We attempt
    to find out if there is any one case, any single row in which all the premises are
    true andthe conclusion is false? Ifthere is sucharowthe argument form is invalid;
    if there is no such row the argument form must be valid. Thus after the full affay
    has been neatly and accurately set forth, great care in reading the Truth Table
    accurately is ofthe utmost importance.
    15.9 SuggestedReeding:
    l. A Survey of Symbolic Logic . By,C .I. Lewis
    2. Symbolic Logic (56 edition) By Irving M.Copi
    3. Introduciion to Logic By Patrick Suppes
    4. Introduction to Logic By Irving M. Copi and Carl Cohen
    5 l,ogc By W.H.Newton-Smith \l
    '1
    15.10 Exercise A .(Answer and euestions)
    l. How does logic use symbols?
    2. Write a shorf note on Argument Form
    3. Distinguish between simple and compound statements. ,

    4. Explainconditionalstatement "'t'

    108
    SYMBOLICLOGIC
    Lesson No. 15
    Semester-1st
    PhilmoPhY
    Urft-V
    5.4 Fundamental Principles of
    Logic
    BY D1 P. P' Singh

    5.1 Objectives
    5.2 lntroduction
    Fdur ftindamental principles of
    Ingic'
    5.3
    5.4 To sum uP
    5.5 SuggestedReading
    5.6 ' Exercise (Answer the Questions)
    5.1. Obiectives
    the necessary and sufficient condition
    ' To enable the students to understand
    of valid thinking'

    power ofconsistent thinking''


    ' To develop in the students the
    oflogical
    ' To give them an understanding
    ofthe nature ofthe principles
    \ fttutktutg.

    5.2. Introduction
    Intraditionaltogiconefindsthreeprinciplesuponwhichalllogicalthinkiy
    known as the
    is supposed to dep"na'
    plt"iples of I'ogical reasolring are
    ff'"*
    fond"m"ntal presuppositions of all
    valid
    Laws of Thoughr .n'"t"p'io"iile'
    "'"
    thinking. Th"r" l"*' fo#"l laws and cannot inform us about the material
    o'
    "'" Thcse laws ate a priori' and are universal
    property of a thing ,'oiotition'
    posturates of arr reasonings like
    the raws of mathematics. These
    are in some sense
    presc.ptive' obedience to them is
    bottr the nece.ory *d ,h" ,ufficient condition
    ofcorrect thinking.
    5.3. Four f,'undamental principles of Logic.
    Aristotle fomrulated three principles
    upon which all logical thinking
    These have traditionally been called: rests.

    l. The principle ofldenrity.

    2. The principle of Contradiction

    3. The principle ofExcluded Middle.

    l. The Principte of ldentitv:


    This principle asserts thatif any statement
    is true, then it is true.Thesimprest
    statement ofthe Principle ofldentity
    is the fonnul4 ..S is S,, or ..Everything
    it is" that the meaning of a proposition is what
    remains the same throughout an
    In other words, the principle of Identity argument.
    asse * .*at eve) statement
    P : P must be true, that every such
    of the form
    statement is a tautology. It holds
    proposition is true thetr it is true'. that .if a
    It is demonshated by the following truth
    tabre.
    P P P:P
    T T T
    F F T
    2. The Princiolc of Contrrdiction
    This principre asserts that ,ro rrare
    ment can be borh true andfalse.
    simplest statement ofthc principle The
    of Conhadiction isthe formula, *
    S canaot be
    both P and not p. or *I{othing can
    be and notr, ;;;" and the same time,,,
    that a proposition cannot be both
    true and false at tt" r"." ti.". 7
    the Principle of conhadiction asserts
    t other words,
    that every shtement of the fornr p. p
    be false, that every such statcment - must
    is self-contradictory. It hords th8t,
    be the case that *p- and.. not p',
    it cannot
    are true at the same time,, is
    demonstrated
    by the following truth table:

    -P e._P) -(P.-P)
    il0
    F F T
    T
    T F T
    F

    (tertium non datur)


    3. Lrinciole of Ercludcd Miildle lts
    is' eilher ffue or false'
    This principle ass€rtethat every statement
    is
    * S must be either P or not P' or everything must either
    simplest forqulation th:
    other
    be ot not be, thata propositio'n
    must be either true or false' In Y-e1dt'
    the form Pv - P
    ,n*rpr" ViAaf"ttserts that every statement of
    "i"*roa"a
    mustbetruc.ThateriErisuchstateBentisatautology.Itisdemonstratcdbythe
    following tnrth table
    P -P PV-P
    T F T

    F T T

    ThusthethreelawsorPrinciplescanbeexpressedbythefollo.rvingstatement
    forms:
    The PrinciPle of ldentitY:
    P:P
    The PrinciPle of contadiction: -(P.-P)
    The PrinciPle of ExcludedMiddle:
    (Pv - P)

    it is sweet (Principle of ldentity);


    If, for example' a mango is s'weet then (Principle of
    cannot be both sweet and not sweet at the sa'me time
    mango
    mango must be either sweet
    or not sweet (Principle of
    Contradiction) and
    ExcludedMiddle).
    since the'y
    asthe Traditional l-aws ofThought
    These ttnee principles are known
    Wilhelm
    In addition to these Laws' Gottftied
    have come down to us from Aristotle' Sullicient
    gives a fourth pri*irn is known as the Princiolc of
    Leibnitz "Oi"nplace wrthout reason' It asscrts- that a
    il;;;; ;il" tr,"t tooiog takes Ihas a ned-ssary and definirc
    consequ€nt has a definirc antefuent ie' every effect
    There must be
    cause. For example wh! mango is
    swee! or' whl it i.1 not sweet'
    of fact'
    Sufficient Reison refers to matter
    sufficient reason for its cause' i'tte law of

    lll
    and is not a mer€ formal law like Aristotle,s
    three laws of thought.
    14.4 To Sum Up:
    Indeed these principres ofthought are the rogical equivalences that have
    been
    considered by the logicians to be
    fiuda'ental in ali rcasoning. Adstotle gives
    a clear
    orpression of these principres. He says
    ofi*. pr inciple of ldentity that aproposition
    orathing is identical withitsetfand implies
    contradiction
    itself.Atr in"*i.*"iliZi" i
    th,o' it is impossibre,for the same thing to beroug
    and not to belong
    to the same thing at the sametime
    in tlre same respectlAnd he says ofthe
    of Excluded Middre that it is not possible that
    ,r*;;
    therre should be anyhi'g between
    two parts of a contradiction. The fourth th€
    principre known as the principre of
    rRaasoz advocated by *ibnitz
    sufuient
    states that iothing takes place without
    a r€ason
    sufficient to determine why it is as it
    is and not otherwise.
    14.5. Suggerted Rerding:
    l. TextbookofDeductivelogic ByBholaNathRoy
    2, Inhoduction to logic By Irving M. Copi & Carl
    cohen(llth edition)
    3. Iogic By Dr vatsyal'an'
    5.6. Ererrisc ( Answer thc Quertionr)
    l ' Explain with concrete ilrushations
    the Fundamental principles of Deductive
    Iogc.
    2. Starc the principre of ldentity, contadiction and Excluded
    3. What are the fundamental principles of togic? ExplainMiddle.
    , .

    their practicel

    4. what do you understand by the Law


    of sufficient Reason? Is it a formal law
    like Aristofle's three laws of thought
    ?

    n2

    You might also like