Philosophy of Research1

The main idea as we have discussed in our introductory class of research is to find the validity of a truthful

statement. In that process two points are important, namely

1) What is knowledge and

2) In what process they come from

But before trying to find answers of these complicated procedures lets do our necessary homework in philosophy.

Philosophy is a branch of knowledge which is considered by some as the mother of all disciplines. The word

philosophy literally means love of wisdom and importantly pure wisdom irrespective of their source and use. It is

important to mention here that philosophy mostly follows logical procedure but also accepts that conclusions can be

drawn from non logical source as well. Logic as a discipline is a part of philosophy but not the whole part. In

philosophy not only the knowledge is important but also the process of attaining such knowledge. This process is

studied with lots of attention.

Branches of Philosophy

The topics that are studied in Philosophy fall into five broad branches, those are:

Branch Description Primary question asked

Metaphysics/ontology Study of Existence What's out there? What is?

Epistemology Study of Knowledge How do I know about it? How we know?

Ethics Study of Action What should I do? How we act?

Politics Study of Force What actions are permissible?

Esthetics Study of Art What can life be like?

Logic is a closely related discipline which tries to answer the question how we reason. It is used frequently in other

branches of philosophy but sometimes is not considered as a regular branch of Philosophy.

Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy responsible for the study of existence. It is the foundation of a worldview.

It answers the question What is? It encompasses everything that exists, as well as the nature of existence itself. It

says whether the world is real, or merely an illusion. It is the fundamental view of the world around us. Sometimes it

is known as ontology as well.

Ethics is the branch of study dealing with what is the proper course of action for human beings. It answers the

question, What are the permissible acts? It is the study of right and wrong in human endeavors. However to

pursue ethics we need to have a well developed notion of good and bad or acceptable and unacceptable. This is not

a product of logic at this level we need to have axioms. At a more fundamental level, it is the method by which we

categorize our values and pursue them. Do we pursue our own happiness, or do we sacrifice ourselves to a greater

cause?

Politics is ethics applied to a group of people2. This branch is concerned with the question that what are the

permissible acts for human beings as a group. In most of the cases behavior of a group of people is quite different

from their individual behaviors.

Esthetics is the study of art and beauty. It includes what art consists of, as well as the purpose behind it. Does art

consist of music, literature, and painting? Or does it include a good engineering solution, or a beautiful sunset?

These are the questions that aimed at in esthetics. It also studies methods of evaluating art, and allows judgments of

1 Preliminary version, comments welcome 2 It is very difficult to find any relationship between the applied version of the concept politics that we have today and this definition

the art. Does anything that appeals to us fit under the umbrella of art? Or does it have a specific nature? Is there any

relationship between art and beauty? If yes what is the relationship and when do we can call an art beautiful?

Sometimes study of ethics and aesthetics are combined under the name of Axiology, the study of value; the

investigation of its nature, criteria, and metaphysical status.

Epistemology is the study of our method of acquiring knowledge. It tries to answer the question, How do we

know? It encompasses the nature of concepts, the construction of concepts, the validity of the senses, logical

reasoning, as well as thoughts, ideas, memories, emotions, and all things mental. It is concerned with how our minds

are related to reality, and whether these relationships are valid or invalid. How the external sensory world is

conveyed to us and the conclusions that we can draw from their impulses.

Now it is an important question that which branch of Philosophy should come first. Ontology starts with cognitive

process and warrant the starting point whereas epistemology starts with the process of learning. Logic, aesthetics or

ethics have their own argument to be studied at the first place. So answer of this question is subjective.

For our purpose we will be concerned with epistemology most. The concept of knowledge will be the appropriate

level to start our discussion3.

The concept of knowledge

The concept of knowledge is difficult to explain as we need to have knowledge about the concept and without

having the concept a priori it is rather optimistic to expect something. There are numerous examples in the history

of where people wanted to explain something without having proper knowledge about the attributes of the concept

itself. So rather than having a general discussion we would like to discuss ideas regarding knowledge of some of the

great thinkers of the past. Most probably there is still disagreement between philosophers regarding what is

knowledge and let alone how we can attain knowledge or find out a piece of truth. We first start with Plato (429-347

BC).

Plato4

Plato actually took defensive approach while attempted to answer questions like what is knowledge and how we can

get hold of truth. Among the two approaches to answer certain question Plato actually took the negative approach5.

He argued first to identify false knowledge and from that wanted to find out the attributes of real knowledge6. In

that process he strongly proclaimed that information received through direct sensory organs are not knowledge. In

favor of his claim he presented arguments in his usual form of dialogs.

He argued that if we consider the sensory perceptions as knowledge then that can create enormous problems as

what is true in the sensory perception of a certain person may not necessarily true to some other person. A

particular object when viewed from a close range looks bigger than when it is seen from a distance. Same object can

be felt heavy or light depending on the level of exhaustion of the person who is lifting that object. Same object may

look green, orange or white when lights of different colors are shed on that. So if we consider our sensory

perception as an indication of true knowledge then that can create contradictions at an unsolvable level.

Again if we consider our perception regarding the real life as an indicator of the true knowledge then that can create

problems as well. Suppose I get a perception that next year I will be the chief justice whereas it may very well

happen that when the next year realizes then I find myself confined in a small compartment of my local jail. So what

3 This text is not meant to supplement philosophical literature, rather it is an attempt to give a modest description of some of the philosophical concepts in layman language 4 His original name was Aristocles but was dubbed as Plato because of his broad physical structure 5 The other approach is positive approach where we take a deductive type reasoning to pin point the concept 6 Plato was one of the earliest proponents of dialectics

is perceived can be very wrong and thus cannot be considered as true knowledge. Not to mention that one of the

basic component of perception comes to us through our sensory organs and we cannot rely on their purity.

Plato rejected the idea of early Greek thinkers that human beings set the price of a certain good following the

motivation that whatever human beings do is based on their perception and/or impulses received through sensory

organs regarding the real life. They do not have any idea regarding the actual true state of the real life. So price set by

their perception is not necessarily the true price of any good.

He also argued that feelings cannot be the source of knowledge. If feelings of a certain person regarding certain

thing are considered as the source of knowledge then it will be very difficult to argue that the feelings of a child and

the feelings of an adult will be radically different and in that case the child has nothing to learn from the adult, which

is obviously counter intuitive.

Based on such motivation, Plato argued that knowledge regarding certain object is actually a combination of many

things. When we come across certain objects in our conversation then most probably we consider few related,

sequential, relatively simple process in a complicated sequence to understand that. When we say that this particular

object is a piece of stone then we consider the concept stone which most probably was stored in our knowledge

base already and then we compare the present object with the perception that we have in our mind. In this simple

process we include comparison and classification acts to identify the object.

But this combination of complex things, are not formed regularly regarding different matters, as a by product of the

experiences of our daily life. For instance suppose I felt and thus made an opinion that it will rain tomorrow. And

suppose in reality it rained. Does that mean that I had knowledge about the occurrence of tomorrows rain?

Obviously not, it is just the case that I made a guess and that worked. This puts the question of attribute of

knowledge into further problem. This means that not only the wrong opinion is not knowledge but also the right

opinion is not knowledge.

So back to square one, what is knowledge? It is not anything dependent on perceptual sensory inputs. It is not our

perceptions, not opinions and not even feelings. If this is accepted then only way that we can have information is

belief and ideas7. So knowledge is not related with real visible world rather it is more related with intelligible world

that is perceived through combination of conjectures, faith, ideas and sensory feelings. In that respect, Plato argued

that the world can be identified into two mutually distinctive parts, intelligible and visible. In intelligible world, we

have understanding and reason and in visible world we have conjecture and faith. These four demonstrations of

human nature direct four different versions of world through which human beings are interacted in this world. Of

these, visible world is of lower standard and people easily can get into that. However information gathered in this

state or conclusions derived in this state do not necessarily lead to pure knowledge and thus we cannot expect much

from here. But in intelligible world, we have understandings which are based on visible world but happen in the

intelligible world. This portion is better than conjectures and faith. Mathematics normally produces knowledge of

this state. In Mathematics or Geometry we reach to a conclusion (that is understanding) based on some premises or

beliefs that we at first accept in our exercise. So any knowledge that we obtain through mathematics is based on

some basic beliefs or premises. So we are not supposed to produce pure knowledge in this way. The source and

process of gaining pure knowledge is reason8.

7 Remember the fascination of idealism among philosophers and Plato is one of them 8 It was very difficult from the part of Plato to argue for a full fledged theological development given the intellectual position of the contemporary Greek and his motivations, but it is clear from the arguments that he placed, that he was skeptical about the usefulness of logic in attaining truth

UnderstandingIntelligible world

Reason

Ideas, concepts, forms, mathematical objects

Conjecture Matter Visible world

Faith Illusion

To explain these different states, Plato actually took help of an allegory example9 where he stated the situation of the

group of people without knowledge by the situation of the cave dwellers chained and away from outside world.

They just get some impulse from the outside real world and they form their ideas based on those impulses. They are

so content with their ideas and arguments that the do not even like to get confronted with the real life situation.

Benedict Spinoza (1632-1677)

Essentially motivated by theological arguments, Spinoza argued that there are two kinds of knowledge incomplete

and complete. The first kind is the result of sensory impulses. Based on such observations we get knowledge which

are incomplete and wrong. The second stage of knowledge is higher than the first stage. It is based on our

intelligence. The first kind of knowledge gives non unified individual impulses regarding objects that we experience.

In the second stage, we combine these individual parts to get a complete picture through our intellectual abilities.

This second type of knowledge is true knowledge and can give us idea about our Creator10 and we can get the

feelings and ideas which in return can make us a better human being.

According to Spinoza there is a third kind of knowledge that is even of higher level than knowledge obtained

through intellectual arguments. That is intuition. Intuition is developed through divine impulse and through that we

can know our Creator.

Spinoza believed that human beings can have true knowledge. The way of acquiring such knowledge is through

patience and hard work. But theoretically it is possible for human beings to know and that is not dependent of some

divine sanction. At this point Spinoza deviates from Plato, who described the attributes of pure knowledge but did

not mention any systematic procedure to get that.

Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716)

Leibniz11 argued that knowledge is rational it can be achieved through logical application of intellect which lead us to

the state of knowledge. He acknowledged that to attain knowledge external experience and internal rationalism both

are required. It is not possible to get knowledge only through external observation or internal rationalism. External

impulses when properly explained and scrutinized through internal rationalism then become true knowledge.

John Locke (1632-1704)

While Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz were proponent of rationalism which means that rational arguments can lead

us to the pure knowledge, Locke argued that there is nothing called rationalism. We are born without any prior ideas

and it is the experiences that lead us to the state of knowledge. However, he distinguished that experience can be

sensation or reflection. Sensation is the part that comes directly from sensory impulses and reflection is developed

when mental activities are done on sensations.

9 Known as Platos allegory of cave 10 It is important to mention here that Spinoza like many other medieval philosophers was completely obsessed with theological arguments and it was rather very difficult for him to develop theories or argument without explicit interference of the Creator 11 Leibniz was rather a mathematician and had a logical frame of mind with very strong and explicit presence of the concept of the Creator

According to Locke conceptions are of two types, basic and compound. Basic conceptions are the conceptions that

we receive through our sensory organs and that are fundamental in the sense that we can not create and destruct

them. But according to Locke we can combine them to create new conceptions. That is, in the realm of mind and

that cannot be considered anything important. In fact, to Locke this portion is just formal and cannot be considered

as the source of knowledge. To Locke the only source of knowledge is sensation, the direct impulses that we receive

from the outside world somewhat contradictory to other philosophers.

According to Locke human mind can get compound knowledge through three different ways. They can combine

few basic sensations to create a compound refection, like combination of beauty and human being can make a

feeling of a beautiful human being. Then we can relate two primary sensations to get a compound relationship, like

cause and effect. The third kind of compound knowledge is obtained through the process of abstraction of common

attribute of several fundamental sensations, like observing a number of white objects we get the feelings of

whiteness.

Islamic view

At this point may be it will be useful to explain what Islam has said about knowledge and gaining knowledge. This is

important as the pure logic based philosophers could not reach into a consensus regarding the true view of

knowledge and the way to attain such knowledge. But one thing they came up with their argument and that is

sensory inputs cannot give us true knowledge. In the holy book Almighty Allah said:

Read! In the Name of your Lord, Who has created (all that exists), (96:1)

And

Has taught man that which he knew not. (96:5)

So it is possible to know according to Islam. And since the knowledge is coming from Allah (SWT) so the

knowledge must be true and pure. The process of attaining such knowledge is reading as mentioned in the above

verses. However, simple reading is not the only way it has to be supplemented by proper level of thinking as well.

Allah (SWT) has said in another verse:

Those who remember Allah (always, and in prayers) standing, sitting, and lying down on their sides, and

think deeply about the creation of the heavens and the earth, (saying): Our Lord! You have not created

(all) this without purpose, glory to You! (Exalted be You above all that they associate with You as

partners). Give us salvation from the torment of the Fire. (3:191)

So reading combined with deep thinking can give us knowledge and that can be in the knowledge about material

world, knowledge about social relationship and knowledge about the spiritual world. Knowledge is important and it

is obligatory for all of us to seek for knowledge. In holy book it has been mentioned that Abraham (PBUH) has

made this following supplication:

My Lord! Bestow Hukman (religious knowledge, right judgment of the affairs and Prophethood) on me,

and join me with the righteous; (26:83)

And a supplication for us as well

High above all is Allah, the King, the Truth! Be not in haste with the Qur'an before its revelation to thee is

completed, but say, O my Lord! advance me in knowledge. (20:114)

There are numerous verses in the holy book where Almighty Allah has mentioned that Allah gave knowledge to

different prophets:

And to Lut, too, We gave Judgment and Knowledge, and We saved him from the town which practiced

abominations: truly they were a people given to Evil, a rebellious people. (21:74)

To Solomon We inspired the (right) understanding of the matter: to each (of them) We gave Judgment and

Knowledge; it was Our power that made the hills and the birds celebrate Our praises, with David: it was

We Who did (all these things). (21:79)

When Joseph attained His full manhood, We gave him power and knowledge: thus do We reward those

who do right. (12:22)

When he (Moses) reached full age, and was firmly established (in life), We bestowed on him wisdom and

knowledge: for thus do We reward those who do good. (28:14)

(To his son came the command): O Yahya! take hold of the Book with might: and We gave him Wisdom

even as a youth, (19:12)

We strengthened his (Davids) kingdom, and gave him wisdom and sound judgment in speech and

decision. (38:20)

And commemorate Our Servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, possessors of Power and Vision. (38:45)

So for Islamic perspective knowledge is not only important it is so essential that we are all instructed to take active

steps to achieve that. It is also mentioned that the successful people (prophets and messengers of Almighty Allah) in

the past has gained knowledge. But the way of gaining knowledge is to read and think deep and obviously ask

guidance from Allah (SWT).