The different ways that we obtain knowledge are in my opinion very untrustworthy by themselves; I mean Savater even explains how we can’t fully trust our own experience to be truth because our perception could be wrong, because our brain could be misinterpreting the information and what we take for the absolute truth is in fact wrong, an illusion.
If we can trust our own opinion how can someone expect us to believe what we read, what someone else tell us, because if our experience is not right why would theirs be; or what we study, because information changes, hundreds of years ago everyone thought the Earth was the center of the universe, then they prove it wrong and everything that was supposed to be the absolute truth changed. The only thing we can be certain about is that there is no absolute truth.
To say there is no absolute truth doesn’t mean that we can’t search for truth, that we can’t get close to find it. We can look for truth, and the most effective way to do it is through reasoning, the most effective way to look for it is taking all the knowledge that we have from the different sources and put it together, we may not fully trust our experience or what we studied but if we combine all that knowledge and reason it we may find the right way, the way that would take us to the truth. There are different ways to obtain knowledge and apart they are not very trustworthy, but together they refute or support themselves, they complement each other.
Right! We've got to combine the different modes of obtaining knowledge to see how the different versions of truth bounce off each other and maybe knock each other down or pull each other up. It's a tricky balance to combine everything you know from every type of source and then slim it down to one most probably truth. But, it's seems the only way.
ReplyDelete