Seeking the Truth
Essay Preview: Seeking the Truth
Report this essay
Seeking the Truth
Many philosophers debated the human ability to comprehend the Truth. Some philosophers reasoned that people might apprehend some or all of the Truth through their five senses. This questioning of knowledge called empiricism challenged seekers of Truth to evaluate their surroundings. Their environment reveals the Truth as they observe everything around them. The observations are beyond just the physical sights, scents and touch of the atmosphere surrounding the person, but also of the universal forces that direct change. Whether philosophers rationalize a higher, powerful being as the director of change or do not acknowledge spiritual beings, they all agree that humans absorb the changes around them and use this data to create their opinions and gain knowledge about the truth.
Others view truth to be experienced through rational thought and discussion. Contradicting thoughts and opposing views generate the reasoning necessary for humans to comprehend Truth. When opinions conflict, this challenges the seekers to debate and struggle through the opposition in a desire to understand the Truth. Wisdom arises during the conflict between intellects even with unknown ultimate Truths. This banter increases awareness of the knowledge found on both sides of an argument. Many philosophers, such as Parmenides – considered the first rationalist philosopher, view arguments as the superlative method to achieving revelation. Educational discussion and disagreements are what keep the world changing and moving. Unlike the touchy-feely view of the sense achieving Truth comprehension, other philosophers seek a method involving thought and opposition.
The more famous philosophers, namely Aristotle, Plato and Socrates, followed the ideas of rationalism. Rationalism approaches Truth through conversational opposition. In fact, Socrates often debated openly with Sophists for sport to aid in increasing his knowledge. Plato deemed this type of knowledge seeking practice as dialectic. Evaluation of all sides of the topic by every participant in the conversation is gaining knowledge and moving closer to comprehending the Truth. This does not allow every thought to be correct. However, recording these incorrect comments is another step towards grasping the ultimate Truths. Flagging the inappropriate conclusions steers dialogue back on track towards the Truth, which is final goal.
Philosophers who opposed the mainly intellectual sparring method of pursuing enlightenment defended their stance through observational skills. They approach Truth through observing and engrossing themselves in the changes and the environment surrounding them. Heraclitus was a major endorser for the five senses drawing people closer enlightenment. He viewed these tools as the most effective source for gaining knowledge because they are constantly aware of the changes the earth exhibits. He argued that the world is constantly in motion, rearranging itself and shifting outcomes of operations therefore the only way humankind keeps up is through the attentiveness of the senses.
These two views split the Greek philosophers and brought about a better understanding of philosophy as a whole. Similar to other areas of life, achieving the knowledge of any Truth takes both the awareness of the senses and the intellectual dialogues. Although the philosophers in the past could not agree on this revelation at the time, their theories and arguments challenge this generation and broaden the overall understanding of the study of philosophy.
Christianity often separates from philosophy because people assume reasoning is not a practical way to study faith. Pentecostals especially are guilty of preaching the message stating that emotions and facts are most important to achieving the knowledge of truth. However, Greek philosophers prove that rational thought and open debates also point to an existing Creator who orchestrates all things. He placed a law in order to maintain morality among people.
Socrates and Plato draw conclusions similar to Christianity, but do not identify completely with this faith. They both hold fast to the argument of Divine Law. They rationalize the necessity for Divine Law and explain why it exists. Plato argues that moral nations are only possible when containing a moral group of people. Without Divine Law, by what guideline will humanity decide morality lies? The desire for Logos and following of the Divine Law naturally provides morality among people and brings individuals closer to understanding the Truth. Living a worthy life enlightens the seekers of Truth.
Although Socrates and Plato stand for an overruling law for humankind, they are missing major facets of Christianity in their rational. Socrates and Plato do not agree with the knowledge of good and evil. They argue that any sinful actions demonstrated are solely because of the ignorance to the ways of Heaven. According to these philosophers, all souls gather in Heaven and overtake earthly bodies when the Higher Power ordains. Since the souls experienced Heaven, they naturally know right from wrong. However, the delivering of the soul to the body blurs the Divine Law and humans must seek to remember the Divine Law. In order to avoid misconduct, people must relearn the Divine Law through debate and experience. This poses a problem for Christians because the Bible states that humans are born into sin. The choices made are purposeful and knowledgeable of the wrong being committed. The comprehension of this knowledge is branded into human nature and they make decisions to sin based on laziness or solely human drive.
Socrates and Plato come closest to the views of Christianity; however, they disagree on the human draw toward sin. They argue that humans only commit wrong actions because they have forgotten the Divine Law they once understood while in Heaven. However, Christianity debates that humans are born into a sinful nature and they must strive to overcome the temptations of earth through rational discussions and awareness of the senses.
As previously mentioned, Plato expounded upon Socrates theory about human souls being stored in Heaven and transported to bodies on Earth when desired. The realities of both physical and intellectual knowledge revealed to the souls while in Heaven are known as Forms. These realities are the knowledge between good and evil along with other practical understandings of concepts that guide us to enlightenment. Concepts such as mathematical reasoning, ethical knowledge and other innate behaviors people automatically exercise all generate the Forms. Plato argued that the Forms explain all rationality and natural behaviors of humans; therefore, any negative action reflected the person’s lack of remembrance of the Forms. A person never executes