On Epistemology

On Epistemology

How do we know what it is that we know and how do we find what it is that we do not know but wish to know?

There are several ways to rationalize what we know, or rather what we think we know. We could attribute that knowledge that we have to Divine Providence, much like Augustine and Aquinas have done. We can admit that we know nothing, such as Plato/Socrates did. We can strive to understand through love and infinite resolution as Kierkegaard did. But it seems as though all these views of epistemology are devoid of a real answer. In the following I will survey three ways in which we think that we learn and provide a philosophical look at some of the most common way that we learn.

We learn by being taught, either by parental figures, or by professional teachers, or by peers. In this case we assume that our parents/teachers/peers have learned these things from someone or somewhere else. It may have been a book for instance. In this book are ideas that were written by its author. The author there for must have learned it from their teacher/parent/peer, and so on ad infinitum. This present the problem of an eternal regression. In order for there to be knowledge there must be a genesis. This starting point is either the starting point for all knowledge or the hope that there is a starting point for all knowledge, as knowledge cannot simply spring into existence. Or maybe it can.

Perhaps the genesis of knowledge is not in the idea that there is a definitive starting point, but in the fact that there is an infinite set of genesis points for knowledge. Here I mean the individual. Now many will say that the set of individuals is not infinite but is in fact finite. While at any one time there is a finite set of individuals in existence, there is the potential for an infinite number of individuals to exist in the future, hence an infinite amount of genesis points for knowledge albeit spread throughout time. So how does the individual become a genesis point for knowledge? We shall see.

The Darwinian idea of Natural Selection is a prime example of creating something new out of something that is, thereby creating something new. While the critical will ask where the first thing then came from, this essay will not attempt to answer that questions as it is best to let theologians and physicists to argue about it. We can imply that through our existence here there must have been a ‘first thing’ and this will be enough to work with without bothering with where it came from. Therefore, this first thing had the ability to create and to change itself over time. Much like a fish might grow larger fins to swim faster; this first thing would adapt and change over time to attempt to achieve a status of steady stability which is what all things desire, as opposed to chaos.

Given the penchant for thought that all the individuals have, the idea of self-genesis of knowledge is a completely justifiable thing in the sense that individuals, who have the power to adapt to their environments, would also have the ability to both adapt their ideas the encompass different ideas within them, and the genesis of new ideas, either new in totality or being derivative of older ideas. Throughout the course of western philosophy we see this happening. Commenting and critiquing another thinker, or another person in general, allows the individual to create new ideas. In fact it is the spark that drives all greater thought. You must look no farther than the Socratic Method that was applied in the Polis of Athens during the age of Pericles and the Thirty Tyrants.  In asking questions the dialecticians are refining a thought or idea. In refining this idea they are intrinsically changing the idea. If you change an idea then it is no longer the same idea. It has become a new and separate idea. This idea then has the ability, based on its interpretation and based on debates and discourses, to propagate more ideas. And so on in an exponential factor to the effect of . A single idea has the ability to spawn an infinite amount of subsequent ideas, much the same as an individual has the capacity to spawn a single idea or thought that will perpetuate into a long string of ideas. This only begs the question as to what spawns the original idea. 

Here is where Darwinism is applied. Much as the fish is able to grow larger fins to swim faster, so to the ability for humans to evolve the power to create ideas. To be the genesis of ideas. We are Creators in every sense of the word, giving ideas life, then the products of ideas a reality. With this ability the propagation of ideas is guaranteed. As long as there are people, there are ideas. We have the power to create knowledge and the power to change knowledge. Quite a scary spectacle.