“What we mean by ‘real’ is what we need to posit conceptually in order to be realistic, that is, in order to function successfully to survive, to achieve ends, and to arrive at workable understandings of the situations we are in.†“Philosophy in The Flesh†by Lakoff and Johnson.
The concept of ‘truth’ is discovered as ‘to be within human existence’. All organisms are creatures of basic needs; the human species has extended those basic needs to include historically created material, social, cultural and intellectual needs.
The more comprehensibly we understand nature and society the more successfully will we achieve those needs. Reality is multi-dimensional thus providing the individual with an unending opportunity to understand the inner structure of nature and society and thus to achieve well being and an ever more sophisticated understanding of truth.
Practical problems lead to theoretical considerations. While the practical human condition constitute the reason for understanding; the realm of theoretical knowledge has its own methods and standards. A theory is true if it satisfies the criteria of truth, as scientifically defined. The human condition, the praxis, shapes the truths humans seek, but not what counts as or constitutes truth. We pursue truth because we desire freedom—self-determination.
There are truths relating to nature and there are other truths relating to society. The pursuit of understanding occurs in a human condition—praxis–in an historical setting. The social sciences, those theoreticians exploring social truth are situated within the praxis and are thus influenced by that which they study.
The natural sciences are able to more-or-less bracket their social condition the social scientist cannot. The social scientist becomes either ‘apologetic’ or ‘critical’ of the existing human condition. It seems that there is a consensus that one cannot remain a neutral and cognizant observer without some degree of bias. Thus the social theoretician is either apologetic or critical of the present human condition.
To be critical of the human condition is not to be negative but to be positive. To be positive in the sense that one attempts to examine the human condition to ascertain how it may be improved. Being a critical thinker is not to be negative but to examine and to focus attention on the weakest link in the society so that link might be strengthened.
We pursue truth because we seek freedom—self-determination. In that we seek self-determination we are responsible for developing an understanding of our society. We cannot accept unvarnished the ideas of the social theoreticians. We must develop the ability to think for ourselves—we must learn to become critical thinkers.
Our schools and colleges have in the last few decades begun the process of teaching the subject of Critical Thinking to our young people. In the past virtually every educational effort has been directed toward teaching young people what to think. Now our schools and colleges are teaching them how to think. It might be compared with the story about if you give a man a fish you provide him with lunch but if you teach a man how to fish you provide that man with the means for satisfying his appetite for a lifetime.
A person who has learned how to think is prepared to evaluate the theories presented and to take responsibility for what he or she accepts as the truer version of truth for them might be.
Chuck
septemberscholar.com