The work which follows may be taken as an epistemological treatise. Empiricism and rationalism as two rival theories of the origin of knowledge have always attracted my interest and attention. The fundamental problem that underlies the age long controversies between empiricists and rationalists is the problem of determining the role of sense and thought in knowledge. I have subjected the traditional approaches made to this problem by philosophers belonging to diverse schools of philosophy to a thorough examination and have indicated what I consider to be the most balanced and plausible view. My humble endeavour has been to combine certain results which were reached by earlier empiricist and rationalist thinkers and should be considered valuable by all. I have tried to indicate that instead of taking an opinionated view of the problem, it is possible to uphold a balanced view. It is this balanced view and the combination of results of permanent value which I have highlighted in this work. The pre-sent volume was my thesis for the Ph.D. degree of the Calcutta University.
It is a pleasure to be able to thank those who have encouraged me to complete this work. My first and greatest obligation is to my revered teacher, Dr. K. C. Gupta, Reader (Retired), University of Calcutta, who gave me immense inspiration to write and also to avoid mistakes and imperfections both of language and argument. I am deeply indebted to my venerable teacher, Dr. T. S. Bhattacharya, Principal, Govt. Sanskrit College (Retired), who had always been very kind to me and had kindly read this work in typescript. The original title of my thesis was "Role of Sense and Thought in Knowledge". But I now think that the title "The Roles of Sense and Thought in Knowledge" would be more appropriate. Hence I have deliberately made this change of title.
Our ordinary perceptual knowledge reveals on analysis the presence of two components viz., sense and thought. The presence of these two components may not be apparent in any or every example of perceptual knowledge because in many cases of such knowledge they are intermixed and intertwined. But we can with some effort of attention distinguish between an immediate awareness or a direct awareness of something which is presented to us at a certain moment and our habitual interpretation (or retention, classification, ordering etc.) of it by thought. Let us take an example from Hobhouse. "This is green" or "that's a loud rushing noise" does not go beyond the present and makes no assertion about a definite object that we can be said to know But the judgment "This is my table" or "That is a train" requires both sense or immediate awareness of something presented to me now and here and an interpretation of it by thought. In other words, in order to make such a judgment we require not only the immediate presence to consciousness of the train or the table but also a clear recognition of the individual that is presented as belonging to a definite class. We can thus distinguish between certain data which are given to the mind and an interpretation of those data with the help of the activity of thought. What is generally called 'sense' points to the pre-judgmental stage of our cognitive experience and is characterized by immediacy and givenness. On the other hand, the main function of thought is one of interpretation. The question might be raised, are sense and thought the only requirements of knowledge? Certainly not. Besides sense and thought knowledge involves memory, imagination, physiological apparatus, etc. Although the importance of the factors other than sense and thought can hardly be under-estimated yet the fact that sense and thought play more fundamental roles in knowledge is generally accepted by empiricists.
and rationalists alike. Besides, to discuss the roles of all these factors of knowledge in a single treatise is a huge task which we like deliberately to avoid here. Hence we shall be concerned with the problem of determining the roles of sense and thought in knowledge. Recognition of sense and thought as indispensable components of knowledge is quite common. But the manner in which sense and thought are conceived by different philosophers varies widely and this divergence is not less prominent in their attempts to determine the respective roles of sense and thought in knowledge. The question that has haunted philisophers for centuries is, does sense or thought play the primary role in know-ledge or, are both sense and thought required for knowledge? If we notice the various ways in which philosophers have approached and analysed this problem we can hardly resist the temptation of supporting the witty remark of Berkeley that "Philosophers first raise a dust and then complain that they cannot see". Perhaps it will not be amiss here to point out that there are two dangers against which we must guard ourselves. The first is metaphysical bias and the second is the vagueness of the words "sense' and 'thought'. Let us try to be more precise.
The Absolute Idealists, Bergson, and others have been inspired and guided by their views of ultimate reality. The Absolute Idealist's view of concrete thought is closely linked with his view of ultimate reality. Similarly Bergson's eulogy of 'intuition' and his comparative denunciation of 'intellect' are rooted in his theory of the Elan Vital. We see therefore that the views of these philosophers have been coloured by (because they are supposed to be consistent with) their conception of ultimate reality. But this, we are afraid, does not solve the problem, rather it creates problems of its own. We shall have occasions later to discuss the pros and cons of such endeavours. We hold that the problem is to be approached not with any metaphysical bias or any particular psychological theory in mind. It is a problem that demands in-dependent inquiry and has to be solved, if at all, mainly with reference to perceptual experience.
Hindu (1765)
Philosophers (2327)
Aesthetics (317)
Comparative (66)
Dictionary (12)
Ethics (44)
Language (350)
Logic (80)
Mimamsa (58)
Nyaya (134)
Psychology (497)
Samkhya (60)
Shaivism (66)
Shankaracharya (233)
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Manage Wishlist