Journal Entry #3: Sense Perception

How much can we rely on our senses to comprehend and interpret the world around us? Often our senses must be combined with our intellectual faculties or our sense of reason and logic to put certain things that we sense into context or perspective. For example, looking at a painting of a boat, our brain can differentiate between actually being set in the place depicted by the painting, and simply staring at a portrait of it. We have to incorporate all of our senses and mental faculties to maximize the depth of our interpretation of things around us, but paradoxically all of these senses and interpretations become entirely subjective.

What does this mean? If two people stare at an object in the same place at the same time from the same position are they then seeing the same thing? Ultimately, they are staring at the same object, but they do not see it as the same object. Our minds process different things in different ways simply because our DNA is coded differently and we are all unique in that respect. This centers around the concept of common sense realism, whereby we base our perception and understanding of what we see as subjective beings.

In conclusion, it can be argued that we are forced to rely on our senses because it is in our human nature – we are unable to block out the things we see and judgments we make without evoking a sense of insecurity. However, it would be foolish to base everything on our senses – it is easy for us to be deceived and often scientific reasoning is more effective in helping us to rationalize the world around us.

Journal Entry #2: Scientific Realism

Often in arguments regarding the authenticity or reality of a concept, we hear the omniscient words "scientifically proven". Somehow, the moment these words are uttered, they silence all sceptics as if they have been proven wrong, as if the scientific evidence is sufficient in proving the truth and revealing the reality. This, at the most general level, outlines the idea of scientific realism.

Should we rely purely on science? It can be argued that all of our intellectual knowledge is just passed onto us from secondary sources whether they are teachers, books, scientists, parents or peers. Often these theories are biased – intended to win us over, and rely on different theories that are well known and established in society. We learn of Newton and Einstein throughout our primary years of education but we never take into consideration the influence that other scientists have had on them to allow them to derive their theory. Very often, well established theories can only work as models for society, but will never replicate a real life situation. For example, computer algorithms try to derive the closest possible replicas to real life situations. The scientific knowledge that we gain is ultimately knowledge that has been passed down and refined for years and years. Is it right for us to rely on this knowledge? If we don’t rely on these scientific ideas and theories, then there’s little else for us to rely on.

Journal Entry #1: Literature

Over my past years at school, I’ve studied “English Literature”, but in all that time, never have we discussed the most fundamental question upon which literature exists: what defines literature?

It is difficult to define literature based on specific criteria – seeing whether a literary work meets a list of certain requirements. Often people claim that literature is defined by personal interpretation – people can personally license something as literature if they “see” it that way, and can have their own approach to the text. Other times we listen to teachers and critics to tell us what is or isn’t literature.

Literature can act as a gateway from the past to the present. It can convey the image of different cultures, societies, eras, emotions and so on. It is a form of knowledge that can be passed down for generations, but unlike philosophy it does not question its own understanding. Instead it is unsystematic, and paradoxically, it strengthens our mental faculties, enabling us to better analyze the outer world, the realms of representation and reality, and our own introspection and intuition. We understand a fictional character’s emotions because we have, in some way or another, experienced similar impulses. We can identify sympathetically with something in literature beyond our own ken.

In my view, literature can only be defined subjectively because each reader experiences responses to a literary text that are unique from all others’, and has a different approach and interpretation of it.