Fantasy Philosophical Discussion About Epistemology

A Fantasy Conversation with Two Great Philosophers

         Another discussion I had with two of history’s great thinkers was in the realm of epistemology also referred to as the Theory of Knowledge.  This time it is both George Berkeley and Immanuel Kant that provide some stimulating conversation and insight on the subject after I posed a single question to them; what can be truly known?  As you will read, this question is extremely deep and difficult for even the most intellectual minds in philosophical history.

       Now if you know George Berkeley, or read any of his work, especially A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, then you would know his stance on the subject is that “to be is to be perceived”.  He restates this argument aloud again as though neither I nor Immanuel Kant have ever heard or read his widely known beliefs before.  Basically his answer is no because truth is just an idea or perception of the sensible world.  While both I and Immanuel agreed that he exposed the flaws or poked holes in (however you choose to see it) John Locke’s  An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, we couldn’t accept perception alone as the only measure of true knowledge.  And I as I pointed out to George Berkeley, God was his ultimate answer to the physical world that he couldn’t fit into his own theory.  Kant countered by insisting that true knowledge comes from using our minds to interpret our sensory experiences and not sensory experience alone.  And that an external, material world must exist in order for our senses to actually be of any value.  “Otherwise,” he continued, “why would we have any need for them or God have endowed us with them?”  I could tell this question bothered Berkeley.  After a few minutes of intense thought, Berkeley finally responded by suggesting that it is the mind that allows the senses to exist because it believes them to exist and uses them to develop perceptions and ideas.  But it was Kant that had the last word by saying that the world of objects indeed exists and our minds allow us to interpret, remember, organize experiment and test our theories to gain a better understanding of the material world and allowing true knowledge to be attainable.

           A long period of silence gave the three of us a chance to reflect on the conversation.  I began to understand why Kant felt obligated to combine the rationalist and empiricist view into a unified theory.  Both were dead ends when followed to their conclusion but I wondered how he could be certain in his assumption that the material world actually exists if other great philosophers were not as convinced.  However I found it equally as hard, if not harder, to accept Berkeley’s answer that nothing can ever be truly known. How can he say that confidently?  How is that statement in itself truly known if nothing can be truly known?  It is a self-contradicting statement and argument.  Also, I wonder how can we contemplate these things forever and never achieve any real or true knowledge about it.  How can verifiable and repeatable results not lend to the validity of certain things being facts instead of theories?   The fact remains that we, humans, have achieved many things based on what we believe to be truths.  We have developed fundamental laws and mathematics that are the foundations for our technological advancement and our civilizations ultimate success.  All of which seem to support the idea that some things are truly known.  

         In conclusion, after reflecting on the conversation with these two highly intelligent men and reviewing several other opinions and theories from a few other notable philosophers on the same subject, I found that some things can be truly known while others may never be.  I say that I honestly found Kant’s theory to be much more likely then Berkeley’s.  Personally I completely believe and hold certain things to be undoubtedly true and no matter how hard we may try to disprove them as true we cannot.  For example water is wet, life exists and the sun is hot and bright. These things are facts not because I or we all experience them with our senses but because we have cannot disprove their existence or end their existence. They are not here simply because I or we experience them or perceive them because we have not always existed and at some point we will all cease to exist.  Yet water will still be here and wet, life will still exist in some form or another and the sun will shine regardless of whether they are experienced by humans or not.