repeatkeythirplatLESSON 5

LESSON:  METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING

                 The famous Socratic Method consists of asking a series of critical questions in order to unmask the
sophistry of those who cu a monopoly of the truth. The quest for the truth begins with questioning The search for
truth, it can be said, and not really the possession of it, is the true goal of philosophy of In this lesson, Plato's
idealism, Husserl’s phenomenological method, Kuhn's scientific revolutions, and the distinction between Western
and Oriental thought will be introduced Let's Examine There is a famous story told about Diogenes the Cynic and
Alexander the Great, then the strongest ruler in the world.

                 It is claimed that Alexander came to visit Diogenes and asked him if there is anything he could do to him to
relieve him of the very miserable condition in which he existed.

             Diogenes is supposed to have replied: Yes, you can stand our of my light and let me see the sun.

                 Diogenes, true to his convictions, has chosen to withdraw from the world, thinking that all the products of
human civilization are without any worth. He has rejected society, thereby confining himself to a life of an ascetic.

                The Art of Questioning We are sometimes afraid to ask questions. Diogenes was unique in the sense that
he did not fear the authority and power of Alexander the Great. Had Diogenes existed today, he would have
symbolized defiance to dictatorships and the hegemonic relations between our world and that of the West. Plato
prescSocrates and the sophists.

                  The sophists were itinerant teachers who specialized in rhetoric and in the techniques of teaching of
philosophy in Athens during the 5th B.C.E. In Plato s Dialogues, the participant questions, analyzes, and examines
certain claims, through the critical method employed, Plato teaches how to determine and distinguish the truth
from opinion.

                  The Dialogues of Plato contains stories which help the reader describe a philosophical concept that he
wishes to explain, e.g iustice, the beautiful, he good, and many others main character.

                 Socrates acts as the Philosophy often puts into question our assumptions about the People can be
distracted by concerns which limit world. For opens the broad horizon which one recognizes unity in to experience
what is most meaningful Philosophy allows people to see the big picture.

                I Convergence of things, or of the notion of wholeness where One gets is considered as one of the most
important philosophers Were In world. He divided reality into two: the world of forms and the world of objects.

                He separated forms from concrete things so t that they exist apart from the worldly things that we see.
Forms have independent existence; they can persist even though particular things perish.

               Plato writes that "form is the cause of the essence of a thing an For Plato, what is beautiful and what is just
are in the ideal world The form of beauty is its perfection and the form of justice is perfection justice.

                Beautiful things or the human forms of justice are imperfect For Plato, these cannot be considered as the
really real. Reality dwells in that which remains and stays in the perfection of its being.
                 It an be said that beautiful things in their multiplicity point toward a beauty from which everything else
derives its beauty0 In this view, beauty in the human world or the manifestations of beauty in the realm of objects
is a mere semblance of real beauty.

              Plato explains that forms are the changeless, eternal and non- material essences or patterns of which the
actual visible objects we see are mere copies. He says that permanence is the basic criterion of reality The world of
the senses for him then is not the reality.

               Plato’s idealism teaches us that truth belongs to the mind or intellect. Where is man in this scheme of
reality? Man, according to Plat is his soul.

               This soul is tripartite. It consists of three elements: appetitive, which is concerned with bodily pleasures: the
spirited which is concerned with emotions; and the logical, which is concerned with reason as the seat of control.

             For Plato, this world that we inhabit is not the truth. This bodily existence that we have is an imprisonment
of the soul.

           The reality of being human dwells in mans pure and as such, the body is no more than a distraction in the
search the truth.

 He is widely considered the pivotal figure in the history of Ancient Greek and Western philosophy, along with his
teacher, Socrates, and his most famous student, Aristotle. Plato has also often been cited as one of the founders
of Western religion and spirituality. The so-called Neoplatonism of philosophers
like Plotinus and Porphyry influenced Saint Augustine and thus Christianity. Alfred North Whitehead once noted:
"the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series
of footnotes to Plato."[5]

Plato was the innovator of the written dialogue and dialectic forms in philosophy. Plato is also considered the
founder of Western political philosophy. His most famous contribution is the theory of Forms known by pure
reason, in which Plato presents a solution to the problem of universals known as Platonism (also ambiguously called
either Platonic realism or Platonic idealism). He is also the namesake of Platonic love and the Platonic solids.

Docta ignorantia-is the doctrine closely linked to the method of question and answer which Socrates used in
teaching the truth.
LESSON 6

Socratic questioning (or Socratic maieutics)was named after Socrates. He utilized an educational method that focused

on discovering answers by asking questions from his students. According to Plato, who was one of his students, Socrates
believed that "the disciplined practice of thoughtful questioning enables the scholar/student to examine ideas and be
able to determine the validity of those ideas" . Plato described this rigorous method of teaching to explain that the
teacher assumes an ignorant mindset in order to compel the student to assume the highest level of knowledge  Thus, a
student has the ability to acknowledge contradictions, recreate inaccurate or unfinished ideas and critically determine
necessary thought.

Socratic questioning is a form of disciplined questioning that can be used to pursue thought in many directions and for
many purposes, including: to explore complex ideas, to get to the truth of things, to open up issues and problems, to
uncover assumptions, to analyze concepts, to distinguish what we know from what we do not know, to follow out logical
consequences of thought or to control discussions. Socratic questioning is based on the foundation that thinking has
structured logic, and allows underlying thoughts to be questioned. The key to distinguishing Socratic questioning from
questioning per se is that the former is systematic, disciplined, deep and usually focuses on fundamental concepts,
principles, theories, issues or problems.

  The Art of Questioning

Socratic questioning is referred to in teaching, and has gained currency as a concept in education, particularly in the past
two decades. Teachers, students, or anyone interested in probing thinking at a deep level can construct Socratic
questions and engage in them. Socratic questioning and its variants have also been extensively used in psychotherapy.

When teachers use Socratic questioning in teaching, their purpose may be to probe student thinking, to determine the
extent of student knowledge on a given topic, issue or subject, to model Socratic questioning for students or to help
students analyze a concept or line of reasoning. It is suggested that students should learn the discipline of Socratic
questioning so that they begin to use it in reasoning through complex issues, in understanding and assessing the thinking
of others and in following-out the implications of what they and others think. In fact, Socrates himself thought that
questioning was the only defensible form of teaching.

In teaching, teachers can use Socratic questioning for at least two purposes:

 To deeply prove student thinking, to help students begin to distinguish what they know or understand from what
they do not know or understand (and to help them develop intellectual humility in the process).
 To foster students' abilities to ask Socratic questions, to help students acquire the powerful tools of Socratic
dialogue, so that they can use these tools in everyday life (in questioning themselves and others). To this end,
teachers can model the questioning strategies they want students to emulate and employ. Moreover, teachers
need to directly teach students how to construct and ask deep questions. Beyond that, students need practice to
improve their questioning abilities.

Socratic questioning illuminates the importance of questioning in learning. This includes differentiating between
systematic and fragmented thinking, while forcing individuals to understand the root of their knowledge and ideas.
Educators who support the use of Socratic Questioning in educational settings argue that it helps students become active
and independent learners. Examples of Socratic questions that are used for students in educational settings: 

1. Getting students to clarify their thinking and explore the origin of their thinking

'Why do you say that?', 'Could you explain further?'

2. Challenging students about assumptions

 'Is this always the case?', 'Why do you think that this assumption holds here?'

3. Providing evidence as a basis for arguments

'Why do you say that?', 'Is there reason to doubt this evidence?'

4. Discovering alternative viewpoints and perspectives and conflicts between contentions

'What is the counter-argument?', 'Can/did anyone see this another way?'

5. Exploring implications and consequences

 'But if...happened, what else would result?', 'How does...affect...?'

6. Questioning the question

'Why do you think that I asked that question?', 'Why was that question important?', 'Which of your questions turned out
to be the most useful?'

Socratic questioning and critical thinking

The art of Socratic questioning is intimately connected with critical thinking because the art of questioning is important
to excellence of thought. Socrates argued for the necessity of probing individual knowledge, and acknowledging what
one may not know or understand. Critical thinking has the goal of reflective thinking that focuses on what should be
believed or done about a topic. Socratic questioning adds another level of thought to critical thinking, by focusing on
extracting depth, interest and assessing the truth or plausibility of thought. Socrates argued that a lack of knowledge is
not bad, but students must strive to make known what they don't know through the means of a form of critical thinking.

Critical thinking and Socratic questioning both seek meaning and truth. Critical thinking provides the rational tools to
monitor, assess, and perhaps reconstitute or re-direct our thinking and action. This is what educational reformer John
Dewey described as reflective inquiry: "in which the thinker turns a subject over in the mind, giving it serious and
consecutive consideration." Socratic questioning is an explicit focus on framing self-directed, disciplined questions to
achieve that goal.

The technique of questioning or leading discussion is spontaneous, exploratory, and issue-specific. The Socratic educator
listens to the viewpoints of the student and considers the alternative points of view. It is necessary to teach students to
sift through all the information, form a connection to prior knowledge, and transform the data to new knowledge in a
thoughtful way.

It has been proposed in different studies that the "level of thinking that occurs is influenced by the level of questions
asked". Thus, utilizing the knowledge that students don't know stimulates their ability to ask more complex questions.
This requires educators to create active learning environments that promote and value the role of critical thinking,
mobilizing their ability to form complex thoughts and questions.
LESSON 7
 

The nature of science and nature of scientific knowledge are two dimensions of scientific literacy sometimes used
interchangeably in the literature to refer to the same understandings. There are, however, distinctions between these
two dimensions of scientific literacy which merit discussion. The differences generally relate to the distinctions which can
be made between the terms "science" and "scientific knowledge". The definition of science presented below, used as a
working definition of science in the author’s course, helps to depict the distinctions made between the nature of science
and the nature of scientific knowledge. Aspects of this definition which depict the nature of science attest to science as a
human activity, a process used to investigate natural phenomena, a process used to add to an existing knowledge base,
and a social enterprise. Scientific knowledge, as presented in the definition, is a product of the human process of science
and its social context.

Science consists of two things: a body of knowledge and the process by which that knowledge is produced. This second
component of science provides us with a way of thinking and knowing about the world. Commonly, we only see the
"body of knowledge" component of science. We are presented with scientific concepts in statement form – Earth is
round, electrons are negatively charged, our genetic code is contained in our DNA, the universe is 13.7 billion years old –
with little background about the process that led to that knowledge and why we can trust it. But there are a number of
things that distinguish the scientific process and give us confidence in the knowledge produced through it.

The Nature of Scientific Knowledge

The nine main characteristics of science are as follows: 1. Objectivity 2. Verifiability 3. Ethical Neutrality 4. Systematic
Exploration 5. Reliability 6. Precision 7. Accuracy 8. Abstractness 9. Predictability.

1. Objectivity:

Scientific knowledge is objective. Objectivity simple means the ability to see and accept facts as they are, not as one
might wish them to be. To be objective, one has to guard against his own biases, beliefs, wishes, values and preferences.
Objectivity demands that one must set aside all sorts of the subjective considerations and prejudices.

2. Verifiability:

Science rests upon sense data, i.e., data gathered through our senses—eye, ear, nose, tongue and touch. Scientific
knowledge is based on verifiable evidence (concrete factual observations) so that other observers can observe, weigh or
measure the same phenomena and check out observation for accuracy.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Is there a God? Is Varna’ system ethical or questions pertaining to the existence of soul, heaven or hell are not scientific
questions because they cannot be treated factually. The evidence regarding their existence cannot be gathered through
our senses. Science does not have answers for everything. It deals with only those questions about which verifiable
evidence can be found.

3. Ethical Neutrality:

Science is ethically neutral. It only seeks knowledge. How this knowledge is to be used, is determined by societal values.
Knowledge can be put to differing uses. Knowledge about atomic energy can be used to cure diseases or to wage atomic
warfare.
Ethical neutrality does not mean that the scientist has no values. It here only means that he must not allow his values to
distort the design and conduct of his research. Thus, scientific knowledge is value-neutral or value- free.

4. Systematic Exploration:

A scientific research adopts a certain sequential procedure, an organized plan or design of research for collecting and
analysis of facts about the problem under study. Generally, this plan includes a few scientific steps—formulation of
hypothesis, collection of facts, analysis of facts (classification, coding and tabulation) and scientific generalization and
predication.

5. Reliability:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Scientific knowledge must occur under the prescribed circumstances not once but repeatedly. It is reproducible under
the circumstances stated anywhere and anytime. Conclusions based on casual recollections are not very reliable.

6. Precision:

Scientific knowledge is precise. It is not vague like some literary writing. Tennyson wrote, “Every moment dies a man;
every moment one is born”, is good literature but not science. To be a good science, it should be written as: “In India,
according to the 2001 census, every 10th second, on the average, dies a man; every 4th second, on the average, an
infant is born.” Precision requires giving exact number or measurement. Instead of saying “most of the people are
against love marriages,” a scientific researcher says, “Ninety per cent people are against love marriages”.

7. Accuracy:

Scientific knowledge is accurate. A physician, like a common man, will not say that the patient has slight temperature or
having very high temperature but after measuring with the help of thermometer, he will pronounce that the patient is
having 101.2 F temperature.

Accuracy simply means truth or correctness of a statement or describing things in exact words as they are without
jumping to unwarranted conclusions.

Abstractness :

Science proceeds on a plane of abstraction. A general scientific principle is highly abstract. It is not interested in giving a
realistic picture.

9. Predictability:

Scientists do not merely describe the phenomena being studied, but also attempt to explain and predict as well. It is
typical of social sciences that they have a far lower predictability compared to natural sciences. The most obvious
reasons are the complexity of the subject matter and inadequacy at control etc.

Why is Scientific Knowledge is important?

Scientific knowledge allows us to develop new technologies, solve practical problems, and make informed decisions —
both individually and collectively. Because its products are so useful, the process of science is intertwined with those
applications: New scientific knowledge may lead to new applications.
 LESSON 8
Phenomenology

The phenomenological method aims to describe, understand and interpret the meanings of experiences of human life. It
focuses on research questions such as what it is like to experience a particular situation.

Phenomenology is the study of structures of consciousness as experienced from the first-person point of view. The
central structure of an experience is its intentionality, its being directed toward something, as it is an experience of or
about some object. An experience is directed toward an object by virtue of its content or meaning (which represents the
object) together with appropriate enabling conditions.

Phenomenology as a discipline is distinct from but related to other key disciplines in philosophy, such as ontology,
epistemology, logic, and ethics. Phenomenology has been practiced in various guises for centuries, but it came into its
own in the early 20th century in the works of Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Merleau-Ponty and others. Phenomenological
issues of intentionality, consciousness, qualia, and first-person perspective have been prominent in recent philosophy of
mind.

Phenomenology is commonly understood in either of two ways: as a disciplinary field in philosophy, or as a movement in
the history of philosophy.

The discipline of phenomenology may be defined initially as the study of structures of experience, or consciousness.
Literally, phenomenology is the study of “phenomena”: appearances of things, or things as they appear in our
experience, or the ways we experience things, thus the meanings things have in our experience. Phenomenology studies
conscious experience as experienced from the subjective or first person point of view. This field of philosophy is then to
be distinguished from, and related to, the other main fields of philosophy: ontology (the study of being or what is),
epistemology (the study of knowledge), logic (the study of valid reasoning), ethics (the study of right and wrong action),
etc.

The historical movement of phenomenology is the philosophical tradition launched in the first half of the 20th century by
Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Jean-Paul Sartre, et al. In that movement, the discipline of
phenomenology was prized as the proper foundation of all philosophy—as opposed, say, to ethics or metaphysics or
epistemology. The methods and characterization of the discipline were widely debated by Husserl and his successors,
and these debates continue to the present day. (The definition of phenomenology offered above will thus be debatable,
for example, by Heideggerians, but it remains the starting point in characterizing the discipline.)

In recent philosophy of mind, the term “phenomenology” is often restricted to the characterization of sensory qualities
of seeing, hearing, etc.: what it is like to have sensations of various kinds. However, our experience is normally much
richer in content than mere sensation. Accordingly, in the phenomenological tradition, phenomenology is given a much
wider range, addressing the meaning things have in our experience, notably, the significance of objects, events, tools,
the flow of time, the self, and others, as these things arise and are experienced in our “life-world”.

Phenomenology as a discipline has been central to the tradition of continental European philosophy throughout the
20th century, while philosophy of mind has evolved in the Austro-Anglo-American tradition of analytic philosophy that
developed throughout the 20th century. Yet the fundamental character of our mental activity is pursued in overlapping
ways within these two traditions. Accordingly, the perspective on phenomenology drawn in this article will
accommodate both traditions. The main concern here will be to characterize the discipline of phenomenology, in a
contemporary purview, while also highlighting the historical tradition that brought the discipline into its own.

Basically, phenomenology studies the structure of various types of experience ranging from perception, thought,
memory, imagination, emotion, desire, and volition to bodily awareness, embodied action, and social activity, including
linguistic activity. The structure of these forms of experience typically involves what Husserl called “intentionality”, that
is, the directedness of experience toward things in the world, the property of consciousness that it is a consciousness of
or about something. According to classical Husserlian phenomenology, our experience is directed toward—represents or
“intends”—things only through particular concepts, thoughts, ideas, images, etc. These make up the meaning or content
of a given experience, and are distinct from the things they present or mean.

The basic intentional structure of consciousness, we find in reflection or analysis, involves further forms of experience.
Thus, phenomenology develops a complex account of temporal awareness (within the stream of consciousness), spatial
awareness (notably in perception), attention (distinguishing focal and marginal or “horizontal” awareness), awareness of
one’s own experience (self-consciousness, in one sense), self-awareness (awareness-of-oneself), the self in different
roles (as thinking, acting, etc.), embodied action (including kinesthetic awareness of one’s movement), purpose or
intention in action (more or less explicit), awareness of other persons (in empathy, inter subjectivity, collectivity),
linguistic activity (involving meaning, communication, understanding others), social interaction (including collective
action), and everyday activity in our surrounding life-world (in a particular culture).

Furthermore, in a different dimension, we find various grounds or enabling conditions—conditions of the possibility—of
intentionality, including embodiment, bodily skills, cultural context, language and other social practices, social
background, and contextual aspects of intentional activities. Thus, phenomenology leads from conscious experience into
conditions that help to give experience its intentionality. Traditional phenomenology has focused on subjective, practical,
and social conditions of experience. Recent philosophy of mind, however, has focused especially on the neural substrate
of experience, on how conscious experience and mental representation or intentionality are grounded in brain activity. It
remains a difficult question how much of these grounds of experience fall within the province of phenomenology as a
discipline. Cultural conditions thus seem closer to our experience and to our familiar self-understanding than do the
electrochemical workings of our brain, much less our dependence on quantum-mechanical states of physical systems to
which we may belong. The cautious thing to say is that phenomenology leads in some ways into at least some
background conditions of our experience.