Experiential Knowledge versus Intellectual Knowledge Essay Example for Free

Experiential Knowledge versus apt Knowledge EssayThe Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has for a long time stirred the relinquish on the tug amid experiential friendship (the severalise of familiarity that is gained in the streets and practiced close toly by Huck) and bright intimacy (the kind of knowledge macrocosm taught in schools and by people like Widow Douglas and Miss Watson). The issue dissolve most of the time be phrased as that between being logical and following the concrete consequences of ones logic as opposed to following the dictates of society. This is a theme that was developed archaeozoic on in the book and extends up to the end.Huck, for example, defies society and chooses his own logic in Chapter 1 when he told Widow Douglas that he would prefer to go to hell since this would mean a change of scenery and being with Tom. It is known for a fact that heaven should be the de facto choice of destination for ein truthone. To choose to go to hell, with our without reasons for absent to do so, just means going against what is conventional. Time and again, Huck has dealt with the part of his conscience that told him that keeping and snuggle Jim, a property of Miss Watson versus his indwelling agreement for the man (Bennett 3).These and many antithetic instances in Huckleberry Finn gild the clash between the obviously wrong societal teaching that racism and slavery is good and having sympathy and compassion for the slaves as bad versus the instinctive knowledge that sympathy and compassion towards a slave is valuewhile. In this paper, this clash between experiential knowledge, i. e. , knowledge gained by oneself through the exercise of somebodyal logical demonstration and deduction gathered through experience, and intellectual knowledge, i. e. , knowledge gained through different societal instruments, shall be dealt with. more than specifically, this paper shall address the issue of which of these twain knowledges has more i mportance. Being an issue that is of no light matter, this paper would need to verbalism beyond Huckleberry Finn for aid. As such(prenominal), Philosophy, Ethics, and Education seem to be the most promising atomic number 18as of knowledge that address the issue. Hence, this paper shall look in these directions to rophytle the issue. Specifically, this paper shall have the following parts on acquaintance and knowledge as ain or societal morality as in reliable or authentic and educations as geargond towards making the person fully come out versus education as socialization.The paper shall end with a conclusion. Wisdom as Personal or Societal Philosophy has dealt with the hesitancy on the root of wisdom a number of times and through different meaners. Thomas doubting Thomas and Aristotle are known to deal extensively about this issue, and as such, their philosophies shall be utilized. Since doubting Thomas is known for extensively working on Aristotles works, merging the works of these two thinkers shall not pose any problems. in the first place anything, it would be best to first give a definition of wisdom.At least in the Aristotelian-Thomistic tradition, wisdom is a kind of knowledge that is of paramount importance in directing valet existence towards its occasion or end (Artigas 17). It is that kind of knowledge that aids man to be a better piece being, not merely by providing particular knowledge, moreover most specially a universal knowledge that speaks of the human beings nature, purpose and end. In the end, wisdom ought to lead to the human beings rejoicing, happiness defined as a life that is flourishing. All these ideas seem to be abstract, so it would be best to concretize a bit.At least for Aristotle, living a life that is full of human flourishing means living a virtuous life in a community that allows for the incessant development of the individual. According to the Aristotelian philosopher Martha Nussbaum, this refers to a life whe rein virtues, human relations, reason and other physical capabilities are allowed to flourish by the society (Nussbaum 76-78). More concretely, this means experiencing real friendship, practicing justice, exercising prudence and a master of ceremonies of many other virtues that Aristotle spoke of in the Nicomachean Ethics in a society that value and leaven these.It is allowing a person to have meaningful relations, to engage in activities that nourish ones wizards, imagination, and thought, to have bodily health, to engage in play, to have autonomous control over ones environs and so on (Nussbaum 76-78). So far, it seems that wisdom ought to be acquired for the benefit of the individual that would most probably issue into the good of society. That is well and good, nevertheless, we still have not answered the question as to how wisdom itself is acquired. In this respect, Aquinas has an answer. Thomas Aquinas is known for the Natural Law Theory.The possible action states that m an is born with the natural deftness to know the basic truths or principles or the moral order as the good is to be make and promoted and the evil- headspringed to be avoided (Panizo 56). In this respect wisdom, i. e. , knowledge about what is good and what is to be avoided that ought to lead to happiness and human flourishing, is not only something that man is capable of in fact, man is born with this natural facility. homophile beings are born with the disposition to want what is good and to avoid what is evil. Thinking about it, this medieval theory seems to make a lot of sense.Is it not true that no human being ever does something which for her/him is plainly without good or any sort of benefit? Even actions that may be considered as evil by many still have some sort of perverted goodness in it. Actions such as murder, drug trafficking, etcetera, still give frolic to those who engage in them. But, does this mean that these actions are chastely good? Aquinas would not agr ee. He would say that though nature has granted man the electrical condenser to know what is good and evil and to want good over evil, still, error may happen.Error occurs at once the basic principle, good is to be done and sought after, evil is to be avoided (Aquinas 197) is applied. In fact, there is a hierarchy of difficulty when it comes to the application of this basic principle, the most difficult application of it called remote conclusions are expound as not easily drawn by ordinary people, for they involve education in theology and philosophy, and deep reflection (Panizo 59). These involve judgments on issues like euthanasia, divorce, abortion, etcetera. We have reached a point then when natural wisdom, i. e. , wisdom depending on reason alone, becomes insufficient.Life is so full of instances when remote conclusions are needed and called for. The melancholy thing is, this knowledge is hard to come by and a human being is left with no option but to listen to the dialogu es of the people in the academe. For Aquinas and Aristotle, experiential knowledge is not enough. It could only get us so far. This then brings us to the discussion of the place of intellectual knowledge in Philosophy. According to Aristotle, human beings need a role model to live a flourishing life. An keen person is considered the standard for most of us who are still aiming for human flourishing, for a life of virtue.An magnificent person is defined as he/she whose wishes will be what is wished in reality (Aristotle 65), i. e. , the wishes of the excellent person is that which is truly good for the human being. An excellent person is the exact opposite of the base person to whom pleasure would seem to cause deception since it appears good when it is not (Aristotle 65). Thus, modeling is Aristotles system of knowing what is worth imitating and what is not. To add to this, it must be recalled that for Aristotle (as with the other Greek thinkers), education has an indispensable ro le in speech an individual to perfection.This is the very reason why the Academy and the Lyceum were established. In these schools, individuals from different cities merge to get on their knowledge, to share each others knowledge and in this sense socializing each other. Hence, at least in Aristotle and Aquinas philosophy, though natural wisdom or experiential knowledge may be the starting point, this is not enough. Intellectual knowledge is still necessary since remote conclusions are invariably called for to ultimately be happy and live a flourishing life. Authentic and Inauthentic theologybeyond the epistemology of Aristotle and Aquinas is the perspective that morality or ethics may be inauthentic or authentic. This is the very idea of Michael Moga in the book, Toward Authentic Morality. According to Moga, ones sense of right and wrong can either be wholly dependent on ones culture (i. e. , inauthentic morality) or it could come from ones personal choice (i. e. , authentic mor ality). This is the very same clash between the self and the society that we have been talking about. According to Moga, most people ascribe to inauthentic morality.This is the sort of morality that gives in to social pressure, that kind of pressure that forces us to act and think in a particular way without exactly knowing why such an action or thought should be considered moral. We would not have to go very far to understand inauthentic morality. Most adolescents and striplings are unprotected to peer pressure when it comes to many facets of their lives. The very persistence of racism and discrimination speak of a seedy reasoned morality that rest on social acceptance. In fact, Moga sets out the characteristics of inauthentic morality.The following are the characteristics of this type of morality. Inauthentic morality is characterized by being found on certain rules and values corroborate by culture it is universal in its application, i. e. , it is valid for everyone they imp act individuals as set of morality that is external, i. e. , the source of morality is something outside the self these laws are anonymous the individual is haunted by fear and mortify the moral obligation is something that comes from authority and it is fluctuating in influence (Moga 35-39).This is the sort of morality experienced by the typical teenager who follows his/her groups choices. Such an individual follows rules not her own, a set of rules she may find difficult to follow since it is something external, nevertheless the breaking of such group rules result to fear and disconcert. This teenager considers the lead of the group as the one vested with authority to enforce such rules. Though this morality is most stark among teenagers, adults may very well be living this sort of morality.We would only have to look around shopping malls to see how many adults go with the flow without thinking why. Supposedly at the other extreme is authentic morality. This morality results fro m ones personal decision to accept a set of values and morals after necessary reflection. Again, this sort of morality has characteristics it is in person chosen and accepted it is based on a rational appreciation it is not based on fear or shame morality as an expression of ones freedom and it is based on what one personally cares for, i. e. the very principles that one values (Moga 39-41).This is the sort of morality of individuals who have taken enough time to think over his/her morals. This would be represented by an individual who does an action and could very likely explain and be personally involved in the very principle of ones actions. This would be the individual whose sense of morality is not dependent on what others will say but rather on a clear set of personally chosen moral principles. Though individuals must all aim for authentic morality, Moga insists that both moralities are important.In the first place, all human beings undergo the inauthentic morality pointednes s where parents become the sole authority from whom morality emanate. Nevertheless, we should not stay this way. After being exposed to different sets of moralities, it is the individuals responsibility to think and chose which of these moralities shall be made personal. Thus, at least in the respectable perspective, the social and the personal ought to go together, though in the end, the social should be for the personal. ConclusionWe have seen that at least in Philosophy and Ethics, there really is no real clash between the personal and the social, between intellectual knowledge and experiential knowledge. Clashes happen in Philosophy when error exists in the mind and nothing is done to correct the error. This error may of course exist not only with individuals but also in groups such as those in the academe. Nevertheless, we have clearly stated above that intellectual knowledge is there not to ram down society on the throats of individuals but rather to further perfect experien tial knowledge for the sake of human flourishing.The same may be said in the field of ethics. Both authentic and inauthentic moralities are there and both have uses in society. Nevertheless, in the end, inauthentic morality ought to be the material source of inputs for the eventual authentic morality of a person. Morality only becomes stagnant when there is no interaction between the inauthentic and authentic. To answer the question which of the two knowledges is more important, we could qualifiedly say that both are important as long as there is tokenish error and that the ultimate purpose is human flourishing.