This week I read both the preface of Critique of Pure Reason by Kant, Theaetetus by Plato, as well as a number of texts about what was brought up in the first two. To understand the two main texts I had to look up a lot of words and expressions I hadn’t heard or thought about before, such as metaphysics, a priori, a posteriori, dogmatic and more.
I read the texts all the way through once before writing about them, and then looked at portions of them more studiously when needed to answer some question I was supposed to answer/reflect over or if it was something I thought about and wanted to understand more clearly.
In the seminar my fellow classmates and I talked about if there is a truly objective world outside of ourselves, if we even can imagine a world as it is without first it being perceived by a human. We also discussed how raw sense data can’t generate knowledge; it is first when that data is processed, by us humans, that knowledge is generated.
In lecture I learned about Kant’s forms of intuition and twelve categories, and the quote “Perception without conception is blind; conception without perception is empty.” by Kant stuck with me. We can’t understand what we experience if we don’t have a priori concepts, and concepts without experience are just empty.
Another quote by Kant I thought was good to have in mind, especially when doing research, was: “View nature with the intent of receiving information, not as a pupil who recites the teacher, but as a judge who compels the witnesses to reply to the questions he asks them.”
First after reading next week’s texts I learned that Socrates in Plato’s text was performing a dialectic through his dialogue. He brought up a thesis and then it’s contradictions to prove it wrong, and kept on doing this to reach an answer.
I believe my perception of this week’s theme and terms as very hard to digest has changed a little after gaining some knowledge about them.
I personally think that there is objective world outside ourselves. If everyone produce knowledge starting from priori or sense of perception I think our world would have a hard time discover new things; like ‘gravity’ ‘force’ . Those term before it becomes term or knowledge I also wonder how it is started maybe viewing the world from objective view.. raw sense of date ? Because it is something so far away from us. Like how kant told that we can questions everything about the world even the world itself.
ReplyDeleteGreat reflection blog by the way ☺
Did you discuss Plato’s text in the seminar? Did you learn anything new about Plato’s ideas concerning knowledge and perception after your first blog post?
ReplyDeleteSide note: In your first blog post you switch between using quotation marks and colon when you quote a person, the quotation marks made it easier to read. (I am referring to the sentence that starts with “What he says is: since metaphysics hasn’t been able to enter upon…”)
I did not think of reading the texts referred to in our texts. That sounds like a good way to understand their thoughts better!
It is interesting that you connected the information of theme 1 and theme 2 and concluded that was performing dialectics. This is very insightful and I'm glad I came across your blog and found it.
ReplyDeleteGreat reflection, it seems like you've grasped everything really well! And I like the quotes you've used, they summarize what we've done during the week nicely, especially “View nature with the intent of receiving information, not as a pupil who recites the teacher, but as a judge who compels the witnesses to reply to the questions he asks them”. This seems like an engineering quote, since I do believe that problem solving comes from thinking about things from a different perspective, through analysis and not only from observing an object as it is (although the last aspect does come in handy sometimes, so it's probably good to find a balance). Pretty blog layout as well! :)
ReplyDeleteGreat post theme reflection! Your week was definitely similar to mine. It is nice that you have included quotes from both the reading and the lecture, this means that things really stuck with you which is nice. The fact that you took a concept from Theme 2 and applied it to the knowledge you gained this theme is also really nice to read! I hadn't made this connection, but as you say the concepts and Plato's text do fit together nicely!
ReplyDeleteWell-rounded reflection indeed! Keeping the quote about "being a judge, not a pupil" throughout this course might prove useful - thanks for the tip! I wonder if there are other terms like dialectic that can be applied to our former texts, by learning from our future texts.
ReplyDeleteI like how you focused in your pre-reflection on metaphysics and its working on being a secure course of science. I have not yet perceived it in comparison to mathematics and natural science. Interesting! Thanks for the examples you brought up while reflecting on Socrates' concept of empiricism.
ReplyDeleteIn your post reflections you did a good job in contemplating on what you have learnt during week 1. I really like the quote you included in the text - it really sums up Kant's depiction of reason. Following his advice, we maintain the purity of cognition and continue to actively ask questions, not acting as a mere observer but an active participant.
Really liked your reflection prior to the theme. It showed that you'd studied the texts more in-depth, and by that I mean that it looked like you understood the concepts used in the texts (i.e a posteoreri, a prio etc etc) as well as the context they were used in. Would've liked to see something about the categories of understanding, like what you understood about them and so on.
ReplyDeleteNevertheless it was an interesting read, and especially in the post prior to theme 1.
Good job. Keep it up!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete