Truth, Goodness and Facts

 Truth, Goodness and Facts

Horkheimer’s critique of Kant was over the assumption that the good brought happiness!   Kant believed that we must do our duty even if it meant every person on earth would suffer. Kant is a non-consequentialist and happiness, as well as suffering, are consequences. Kant does not care one whit about consequences, he cares about motives, intentions, good will; he cares about what happens BEFORE the action is performed, not about what happens after duty is fulfilled.

‘Good or happiness’ - many philosophers believe that “good” means happiness, which is not always clear cut. Good is too often a non-cognitive term - good cannot be perceived. And, good does not necessarily lead to happiness.

Truth also is vague. Truth as truth-telling is different from truth as factual. One can be telling the truth in terms of their emotional state of mind or consciously while being completely erroneous about the facts. But, many philosophers equate truth and rightness, that in being “right” they articulate the truth which is not appropriate. 

Truth may not require evidence. Truth may forever be unknown because of a lack of evidence or because reasoning cannot establish necessity. Knowledge requires evidence. According to the foremost epistemological theory, knowledge is "justified true belief." True belief alone is not sufficient for knowledge because one might hold a belief which is true by accident or coincidence. 

A "justification" usually involves the presentation of evidence.

The standard for truth is rationality which means that a truth or rightness claim is motivated by a justified, warranted and grounded consensus which includes the perspectives of all, hence rational. In other words, evidence is necessary.

There are preventions of nature’s wrath. Humans are part of nature, can understand nature and rationally control it. Humans can prevent catastrophes.

Truth adds values to 'facts.'  The term "fact" has two easily conflated meanings. The first is simply "true statement"; truth cannot be understood without redundancy. The second meaning can be compressed as "the way the world is," which includes objects, events, situations, etc., in the universe, including truths about an individual's state of mind: what a person knew about a state affairs at a given time and their intentions.

Truth addresses the accuracy, or adequacy of descriptions about facts. Truth includes several dilemmas beyond the fact-value difference. To explain an event or a happening - why it emerged and how to formulate it, truth must address both teleology or goal-directedness - how certain goals or aims determined or influenced the event, and causality, the causes, reasons and intentions that led to the effects and consequences. 

Formulating the truth about events or change involves interpretation and reinterpretations - properly attributing the teleological and causative elements of the event.

Destruction or Destructuring in Heidegger's Being and Time (1927)

 Destruction or Destructuring in Heidegger's Being and Time (1927) from p23

"In thus demonstrating the origin of our basic ontological concepts by an investigation in which their 'birth certificate' is displayed, we have nothing to do with a vicious relativizing of ontological standpoints. But this destruction is just as far from having the negative sense of shaking off the ontological tradition. We must, on the contrary, stake out the positive possibilities of that tradition, and this always means keeping it within its limits; these in tum are given factically in the way the question is formulated at the time, and in the way the pouible field fOr investigation is thus bounded off. On its negative side, this destruction does not relate itself towards the past; its criticism is aimed at 'today' and at the prevalent way of treating the history of ontology, whether it is headed towards doxography, towards intellectual history, or towards a history of problems. But to bury the past in nullity [Nichtigkeit] is not the purpose of this destruction; its aim is positive; its negative function remains unexpressed and indirect." Macquarrie translation 1962

"This demonstration of the provenance of the fundamental ontological concepts, as the investigation which displays their "birth certificate," has nothing to do with a pernicious relativizing of ontological standpoints. The destructuring has just as little the negative sense of disburdening ourselves of the ontological tradition. On the contrary, it should stake out the positive possibilities of the tradition, and that always means to fix its boundaries. These are factually given with the specific formulation of the question and the prescribed demarcation of the possible field of investigation. Negatively, the destructuring is not even related to the past: its criticism concerns "today" and the dominant way we treat the history of ontology, whether it be conceived as the history of opinions, ideas, or problems. However, the destructuring does not wish to bury the past in nullity; it has a positive intent. Its negative function remains tacit and indirect." Stambaugh translation 1996

The fundamental or elementary concepts were given just earlier by Heidegger as "Insofar as certain distinctive domains of being become visible in the course of this history and henceforth chiefly dominate the range of problems (Descartes' ego cogito, subject, the "I," reason, spirit, person), the beings just cited remain unquestioned with respect to thebeing and structure of their being, which indicates the thorough neglect of the question of being. This sort of list was also found in Nietzsche's "Twilight of the Idols" as unity, identity, permanence, substance, cause, thinghood, being which catches us in error.

Postmodernism

 Postmodernism

Postmodernism is the name of the cultural turn of the 1980's from structures to feelings, also called poststructuralism.

Postmodernism is critical and focuses on the particular, not on the general or universal such as tradition, authority, or rationality. A typical postmodern analysis or criticism focuses on power.

Postmodernism claims that science has been captured by the right which includes both the professional class and the corporations.  Science, and medicine, is considered to be socially situated.

Postmodernists detect increasing social instability and volatility, and a decline in predictability and regularity.

Postmodernism emphasizes the mind, fantasy, and the turning of fantasy back upon itself - fantasy versus fantasy - and this more fantasy.

Knowledge has no stable foundation, such as rationality, tradition or authority. Heidegger and Arendt emphasize that these  foundations have been forgotten, and lied away.

Knowledge must simply be useful but follows artistic and intellectual mutations as represented by Deluge's notion of the rhizome.

The observer and the observed are bound together by historical situatedness and moral commitments, not by notions of truth or value.  Values are properties of products in social relations.

Jameson describes postmodernism as deathlessness, spatial disorientation, a blurring of high future with popular culture, loss of historicity, and the rise of pastiche.

Reason and Judgement

 The Distinction Between Reason and Judgment

"In the Critique of Judgement, however, Kant insisted upon adifferent way of thinking, for which it would not be enough to be inagreement with one's own self, but which consisted of being able to"think in the place of everybody else" and which he therefore calledan "enlarged mentality" (erne erweiterte Denkungsart). Thepower of judgment rests on a potential agreement with others, andthe thinking process which is active in judging something is not, likethe thought process of pure reasoning, a dialogue between me andmyself, but finds itself always and primarily, even if I am quitealone in making up my mind, in an anticipated communicationwith others with whom I know I must finally come to some agreement.From this potential agreement judgment derives its specificvalidity. This means, on the one hand, that such judgment mustliberate itself from the "subjective private conditions," that is,from the idiosyncrasies which naturally determine the outlook ofeach individual in his privacy and are legitimate as long as they areonly privately held opinions, but which are not fit to enter themarket place, and lack all validity in the public realm, And this enlargedway of thinking, which as judgment knows how to transcendits own individual limitations, on the other hand, cannot functionin strict isolation or solitude; it needs the presence of others "inwhose place" it must think, whose perspectives it must take intoconsideration, and without whom it never has the opportunity toToperate at all. As logic, to be sound, depends on the presence of theself, so judgment, to be valid, depends on the presence of others.Hence judgment is endowed with a certain specific validity but isnever universally valid. Its claims to validity can never extendfurther than the others in whose place the judging person has puthimself for his considerations. Judgment, Kant says, is valid "forevery single judging person,"13 but the emphasis in the sentence ison "judging"; it is not valid for those who do not judge or forthose who are not members of the public realm where the objectsof judgment appear."

Excerpt from Hannah Arendt "Between Past and Future - The Crisis in Culture" p221

The teacher and the system

 The Teacher and the System

 The 'good teacher' inside of individuals is a potential. The teaching system that socializes people into teachers, or socializes the entire society to value teaching, education and the teaching profession is the extant reality. The emphasis on evaluation must address both the teacher and the system.

Part of the answer to a good educational system is the teacher, but let's not exaggerate the personal responsibility. There is an institution of education which dovetails with several other institutions. If the connections between the institutions, and within each institution, are too far apart, too differentiated, and not integrated enough, then individuals stick out as problems when the institution does not produce achievement. There are many stakeholders who are responsible from parents, to community leaders and politicians, to universities and especially graduate schools, to professional organizations, to unions, and ultimately to funding decisions made at the political level - the primary system of the social system!

Blaming the teacher is only appropriate in certain cases, most teachers having qualified through the university system by acquiring credentials. Supervision of teachers is perhaps an especially important key area because individuals have to be socialized on the job to perform; resources and training for the specific curricula and student population - the school or community - must be present and must be good for results to be forthcoming.

Look to the organizational dynamics of schools and schooling as a system, an institution. For example, you can teach a curriculum as best as you possibly can but if the students are closed, will not pay attention, or do the reading, education does not work. Getting under the surface problems to motivations, values and especially norms in the community, historically, and socially is very important to creating change in the teaching-learning dynamics in the classroom. 

Some teachers can bear the burden of the entire social force and come through looking good with high rates of student approval and achievement, but these stars are few. More importantly is the issue of motivation, norms and values regarding learning, lifelong learning, not just for the degree, or for the job. This enters into questions of the spirit of a people, their interests, and their appreciation of knowledge!

Multidimensionality

 Multidimensionality

Multidimensionality is an approach to complex problems like action or order that rejects linear analysis and one-dimensional thought. One-dimensional thinking is usually empirical but can be normative where material conditions and social problems are minimized. 

Multidimensionality means that all dimensions are considered and in this sense is considered formal although strictly formal analysis may conflate dimensions or displace one level of analysis by another. For example, one critic will evaluate a theory for its normative emphasis while another critic will emphasize the focus on empirical, material conditions. 

Multidimensional analysis takes the variety of variables and the levels of analysis into consideration; presuppositions and assumptions are analyzed, the subjectivity of actors and groups are examined, objective conditions and events are related to the normative order and the actual behaviors. 

Multidimensionality entails complexity and rejects reduction or simplification. For example, each theorist is faced with selectivity issues like expectations, belief systems or ideology, culture, and systems such as personality and society or social interactions. She does not merely address an issue as normative or empirical or an exigency, but interrelates these levels. And, the theorist is constantly taking up contingent processes and describing their relevance and impact. 

However, multidimensionality is not just methodological or epistemological, presuppositions are addressed; multidimensional approaches synthesize all relevant theories as analytic elements.

Reason or Deduction

 Reason or Deduction

Reason is thinking as the effort to get clear about the meaning of an idea, thought, word or sensation. Deduction is the process of transforming an idea into a proposition, a T-F statement or implication, in a logical sense as necessarily entailing a certain conclusion.  Deduction is more easily understood as drawing a valid conclusion.

Hegel differentiated himself from Descartes' innovation of the proposition.  For Hegel, concepts are used to clarify. The direct awareness of a concept is mediated by reflection - reason as thinking - to produce a clearer concept. Recall that for Descartes the issue is 'clear and distinct ideas.'  Propositional thinking takes the concepts, or words, as given, whereas Hegel provided arguments that propositions required conceptual clarification, thus Hegel's emphasis is on the 'concept.'

A concept is a word plus an idea. A proposition is a combination of ideas: two or more concepts in a meaningful statement, often as a subject-predicate sentence.

Logic begins with identity, A is A. Adorno criticizes the static notion of identity as not only atemporal, A may be not-A at a different time, but also for rejecting the existence of contradictions and paradoxes.  Identity thinking is idealistic: A = A is "ideal truth."  Identity may also be concrete or particular through difference.