Subject-Object Relation in Mullâ Sadrâ’s Theory of Knowledge
ABSTRACT: Dividing knowledge to knowledge by presence and knowledge by representation, Mullâ Sadrâ treats the subject-object relation with regard to each one of them differently. In the former, the subject is united with the object, or rather they are one, and the reality of knowledge is this very unity. In this type of knowledge, there is no medium. Such unity culminates, on the one hand, in knowledge by presence comprehensively and completely conveying the objective reality, and in its untransferability on the other. By contrast, in knowledge by representation, the subject experiences another kind of relation to the object of knowledge thanks to the presence of a medium in the subject’s mind, called "mental form." Mullâ Sadrâ considers mental forms as the mental existence of the same quiddities (mâhîyyât) existing in the external world. The only difference is that they have another type of existence. In this essay, I argue that this approach is congruent with the principality of quiddity, which is rejected by Mullâ Sadrâ. To be consistent with the basic pillar of Mullâ Sadrâ’s philosophy, viz., the principle of existence, I hold that one should begin with the continuity of existence through mental, imagery and external worlds from which the mind abstracts the same quiddity, not vice versa.
The problem of the interaction between subject and object in the process of cognition is a crucial issue in a theory of knowledge. Cognition, a unique window on the objective world, has captured the attention and motivated research and debate by scholars in a wide variety of fields over millennia. In all discussions regarding the phenomenon of knowledge, one question has always been raised no matter what the approach, method or focus of inquiry employed. For Kant, the distinction between nomenon and phenomenon and the determination of categories were major concerns. For the psychology of sensation and perception, the search continues for scientific methods to settle the extent to which an individual vis à vis the environment effects the content, as well as the form, of sensory perception. In the tradition of Islamic philosophy, discussion revolves around the relation between ‘âlim and ma‘lûm (knower and known). The question, expressed more precisely is: How much of what we know can be credited to objective reality per se, and how much is the creation, influence, or interference, of our mental power? It might also be asked how much and in what ways this influence alters the reality of the object of our cognitive system.
The poet, Ai Ogawa, was, according to the biography “Ai,” a mixture of Choctaw, Caucasian, Japanese, and Filipino, she was upset at the fact that she could not identify with a specific ethnicity group (Goldstein.) She was bullied in school because of her mixed race; therefore she expresses a lot of pain through her poems (Goldstein.) In the case of this poem, it can be said that she felt gravitated towards the frustration in which Black America was feeling towards White America. She expresses that the character is going to loot certain items, he is tired of being imprisoned by the white man, then turns around and says that he is upset that that is what the white man expects (Ogawa, 688.) The poet leaves a sense of confusion as to what the character is trying to get across, is it that the individual is raged at the lack of respect he is receiving from White America? If that is the case, then why have the individual looting items and fitting into the stereotype, while trying to make the point that they are tired of being viewed that way and that way and that way only? This further clouds the message of the poem.
Napoleon Bonaparte’s attitude towards the French Revolution is one that has often raised questions. That the revolution had an influence on Bonaparte’s regime cannot be denied – but to what extent? When one looks at France after Napoleon’s reign it is clear that he had brought much longed for order and stability. He had also established institutions that embodied the main principles of the revolution. However, it is also evident that many of his policies directly contradict those same principles. Was Napoleon betraying the same revolution that gave him power, or was he merely a pragmatist, who recognised that to consolidate the achievements of the revolution he needed to sacrifice some of those principles?
The first wave of reality TV shows (such as Survivor, The Weakest Link and Dog Eat Dog) played on people's collective anxieties about the new workplace culture whereby nothing is secure. The threat of expulsion and humiliation is what draws people to this style of programming. This was followed by the lifestyle programs, which were the once removed cousins of Reality TV. Naturally no one is entirely satisfied with the way they live so these programs played on people's desires to improve their lifestyle and living conditions. The third wave of Reality shows (such as Joe Millionaire, The Bachelor and For Love or Money) plays with people's fears of falsified relationships; are there ulterior reasons behind a `supposed' loving relationship (such as money)? The main appeal of Reality television is that the viewer experiences raw human emotions like humiliation, deceit and rejection from a removed perspective. The ability to inspect and analyse the happenings of others without being seen takes on a god-like perspective. It invokes the fantasy of having access to all that is hidden.
In what is widely considered his most important work, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Locke establishes the principles of modern Empiricism. In this book he dismisses the rationalist concept of innate ideas and argues instead that the mind is a tabula rasa. Locke believed that the mind was a tabula rasa that was marked by experience and reject the Rationalist notion that the mind could perceive some truths directly, without sensory experience. The concept of tabula
Reality based television has a broad landscape ranging from competitive game-like shows to programs following the daily lives of a group of people. Every major network now has some form of reality programming because the genre’s shows are high in viewership and require low costs for production. The genre is appealing to viewers because it provides them with a first-hand look into the lives of everyday people, which allows them to observe social behavior that helps them determine what is appropriate or not (Tyree, 2011, p. 397). Since the majority of modern reality stars start out as unknowns, frequent viewers of reality programming believed that fame is obtainable if they appear on a popular show (Mendible, 2004). According to Mendible’s evaluation of the genre in the article Humiliation, Subjectivity, and Reality TV, people enjoy reality programs beca...
Jones, Pete. “We did whatever we wanted, says soldier who raped 53 women.” The Guardian
While Descartes believes this to be incredibly fundamental to human knowledge, there have been several critiques of this over the years. One example that goes against mental transparency is Freud’s idea of the unconscious min...
In his sixth meditation must return to the doubts he raised in his first meditation. In this last section of his sixth meditation he deals mainly with the mind-body problem; and he tries to prove whether material things exist with certainly. In this meditation he develops his Dualist argument; by making a distinction between mind and body; although he also reveals their rather significant relationship.
1. The way shown how we come by any knowledge, sufficient to prove it not innate. It is an established opinion amongst some men, that there are in the understanding certain innate principles; some primary notions, koinai ennoiai, characters, as it were stamped upon the mind of man; which the soul receives in its very first being, and brings into the world with it. It would be sufficient to convince unprejudiced readers of the falseness of this supposition, if I should only show (as I hope I shall in the following parts of this Discourse) how men, barely by the use of their natural faculties, may attain to all the knowledge they have, without the help of any innate impressions; and may arrive at certainty, without any such original notions or principles. For I imagine any one will easily grant that it would be impertinent to suppose the ideas of colours innate in a creature to whom God hath given sight, and a power to receive them by the eyes from external objects: and no less unreasonable would it be to attribute several truths to the impressions of nature, and innate characters, when we may observe in ourselves faculties fit to attain as easy and certain knowledge of them as if they were originally imprinted on the mind.
The simple definition of war is a state of armed competition, conflict, or hostility between different nations or groups; however war differs drastically in the eyes of naive children or experienced soldiers. Whether one is a young boy or a soldier, war is never as easy to understand as the definition. comprehend. There will inevitably be an event or circumstance where one is befuddled by the horror of war. For a young boy, it may occur when war first breaks out in his country, such as in “Song of Becoming.” Yet, in “Dulce et Decorum Est” it took a man dying in front of a soldier's face for the soldier to realize how awful war truly is. Both “Song of Becoming” and “Dulce et Decorum Est” are poems about people experiencing the monstrosity of war for the first time. One is told from the perspective of young boys who were stripped of their joyful innocence and forced to experience war first hand. The other is from the perspective of a soldier, reflecting on the death of one of his fellow soldiers and realizing that there is nothing he can do to save him. While “Song of Becoming” and “Dulce et Decorum Est” both focus on the theme of the loss of innocence, “Song of Becoming” illustrates how war affects the lives of young boys, whereas “Dulce et Decorum Est” depicts the affect on an experienced soldier.
These are the words of a 15-year-old girl in Uganda. Like her, there are an estimated 300,000 children under the age of eighteen who are serving as child soldiers in about thirty-six conflict zones (Shaikh). Life on the front lines often brings children face to face with the horrors of war. Too many children have personally experienced or witnessed physical violence, including executions, death squad killings, disappearances, torture, arrest, sexual abuse, bombings, forced displacement, destruction of home, and massacres. Over the past ten years, more than two million children have been killed, five million disabled, twelve million left homeless, one million orphaned or separated from their parents, and ten million psychologically traumatized (Unicef, “Children in War”). They have been robbed of their childhood and forced to become part of unwanted conflicts. In African countries, such as Chad, this problem is increasingly becoming a global issue that needs to be solved immediately. However, there are other countries, such as Sierra Leone, where the problem has been effectively resolved. Although the use of child soldiers will never completely diminish, it has been proven in Sierra Leone that Unicef's disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration program will lessen the amount of child soldiers in Chad and prevent their use in the future.
Rationalists would claim that knowledge comes from reason or ideas, while empiricists would answer that knowledge is derived from the senses or impressions. The difference between these two philosophical schools of thought, with respect to the distinction between ideas and impressions, can be examined in order to determine how these schools determine the source of knowledge. The distinguishing factor that determines the perspective on the foundation of knowledge is the concept of the divine.
With all the glory and the splendour that some countries may have experienced, never has history seen how only only one man, Napoleon, brought up his country, France, from its most tormented status, to the very pinnacle of its height in just a few years time. He was a military hero who won splendid land-based battles, which allowed him to dominate most of the European continent. He was a man with ambition, great self-control and calculation, a great strategist, a genius; whatever it was, he was simply the best. But, even though how great this person was, something about how he governed France still floats among people's minds. Did he abuse his power? Did Napoleon defeat the purpose of the ideals of the French Revolution? After all of his success in his military campaigns, did he gratify the people's needs regarding their ideals on the French Revolution? This is one of the many controversies that we have to deal with when studying Napoleon and the French Revolution. In this essay, I will discuss my opinion on whether or not was he a destroyer of the ideals of the French Revolution.
One of the most remarkable things about human existence is that there is a subject, an “I”, that experiences intellectual cognition of external things and is able to reflect on these experiences as a cognitive act in itself. How do things that exist outside of my mind come to exist inside of my mind so as to enable me to understand them? The goal of any theory of mind should be to answer questions such as this and, in evaluating the Gettier Problem as objectively as possible, we shall attempt to solve it to see whether it can withstand the single most piercing question we can ask of it: is it true that they are inescapable? In this essay I shall examine the paper of Gettier to answer the question of whether or not man can arrive at knowledge and, if so, how? I shall do this by recounting the problems posed by Gettier to the traditional understanding of knowledge as 'justified true belief', and then present critical responses to it to get to the truth of whether Gettier problems are inescapable, most notably by attempting to answer it with the 'Causal Theory', the 'Defeasibility Theory', and finally by considering knowledge as 'true belief with sufficient warrant'.
Have you ever wondered why people are so addicted to watching their favorite shows on TV? Have you ever wondered why reality TV is so popular? This paper is an explanation of why large numbers of people watch reality TV shows. Proof and facts will be provided showing that reality TV provides entertainment, inspiration, the stirring of emotions, vicarious living, and a substitute for social life for many who watch. Here are a few examples of these statements.