- Show more
THE CURIOUS NATURE OF THE HUMAN AND KNOWLEDGE
Humans by nature are a very curious kind, which is always in search of understanding the world. Throughout history we have changed our conception of this, at first we attributed it to "a God did" because it was the only way we could understand the world, given our degree of technology and general development at that time, later with the Greeks it changed, but not quite, we began to have a greater use of reason and we begin to deduce and induce the phenomena that occurred in our world, of course, without having very successful idea about this, an example of thisIt is to believe that the heat produced in our body was the product of an internal fire that was in our blood, but that when it died it went out and therefore it was that the bodies were cold.
The above may seem absurd for our times, but if we historically contextualize that it makes sense: the fire is hot;We are hot inside, therefore we must have fire inside us. So it is somehow in which the world was understood, for the use of a pure reason.
Passing that time and with the rise of the Christian religion in the Middle Ages, this was certain, it continued to be used, but in turn, this was very influence by the Church which made, in one way or another, the results of this will lead to Christian values as such accepting the explanations of a metaphysical nature.
Already in the Renaissance the principles of the scientific method that currentcomplex that we thought we had.
But in the end and by various events it was concluded that only that observable was true and God was no exception, thus achieving the idea of something metaphysical with reality, resulting in the science we know todayin day. However, all of the above can be called knowledge, true or not a different issue, but after all knowledge
My goal of writing this essay is to be able to explain and that it is possible to understand the concept of knowledge and the way in which it is studied or seen, regardless of that it generates it or the veracity of this because since ancient times we have tried to Define the meaning of knowledge, but covering this concept we cannot rely only on a definition or a discipline so we have several interpretations, but, if we encompass most of these definitions; We understand by knowledge a set of knowledge that are acquired throughout the development of the human being and that are necessary to have a certain awareness of the reality of our interaction in it.
The most accepted branch to define knowledge is philosophy, this is characterized by analyzing, clarifying and systematizing concepts, since doing so calls for our knowledge and can deform our conceptual frameworks (Villoro, 1989) that is, philosophy is responsible To question our knowledge and modify them, however it is not their function to determine the origin and veracity of these, that the work of science.
Philosophy cannot be considered an art, a science or religion. For example: the poet and the artist for example are not directly attentive to the totality of being, such as the philosopher. Their spirit is directed, in the first place, to a specific being and processes and by representing these, they are elevated to the sphere of appearance, of the unreal (Hesse, 1925). With regard to science that is only responsible for determining the genesis of the knowledge and veracity of that based on the process of conception of this. But not the way he thought. With religion it happens that the dogmatic character of this is contradictory to the character of disbelief that characterizes philosophy, although it is starting from a philosophical base.
We can say that philosophy has two faces: one looking at religion and art;Another look at science. It has in common with those the direction towards the whole of reality;With this the theoretical character (Hessen, 1925). Because it must encompass the greatest amount of definitions about reality, as well as the origin, nature and limits of these, this branch is known as gnoseology or knowledge theory.
Gnoseology does not study specific knowledge such as science, this study the nature of knowledge in general defining itself as theory, as opposed to the logic that seeks to establish truth criteria also called theory of correct thought
Mainly, the members of knowledge and therefore their main base are: the object and the subject. These exist in a relationship that remains inseparable during the knowledge process because the fact that without an object there is no analysis by the subject and without subject there is no notion of the existence of the object, however, the absence of asubject that analyzes the object does not mean that it does not exist, it exists very independently the subject and without depending on it. But the subject does not objectively contemplate the object, since it modifies it and at the same time the same is modified
When determining the subject, the object will be independent of it. Since all knowledge mint an object that is independent of the consciousness of the cognitive (Hessen, 1925) this character is typical of all those that the subjects of knowledge emphasizing the indifferent nature that the object and the subjective character to which the object is subjectedby the subject in this generation of knowledge
With these two factors we can generate some kind of knowledge, being the first knowledge that is generated the empirical which is based on the experiences that the subject has in relation to different objects, is learned without science or laws, using only our use of reasonwithout creating any precise and objective definition of the object in question.
Differentiating the belief, since Villoro (1989) defines it as only to give something true without being sure of it and without having sufficient evidence. A belief is a feeling or an act of a specific quality that occurs in the subject’s mind;Therefore it is alone accessible to this subject;Only he can realize that occurrence because he only has data of his own conscience (Villoro, 1989), so a belief is unable to catalog as true or false because of the fact that only exists in the subject’s mind, because forothers is something that cannot be known