Let's continue our exploration of five guiding principles of knowledge by exploring principles 3 and 4.
Guiding Principle 3: Truth is subjective
Throughout the study of epistemology, there is one concept that the philosophers have debated heatedly—and that is the concept of truth. Some—like Descartes (1644)—strove for certainty in truth, while others took a more accommodating stance.
Some philosophers’ beliefs of truth were characterized by absolutes. Plato (360BC/1968) asserted that only ideas are perfect, eternal, and permanent—unlike all things in the physical world that always become corrupted and die. Descartes (1644) argued that knowledge of eternal truths can be attained by reason alone. He asserted that truths are attained by reason and are broken down into elements that intuition can grasp through a purely deductive process resulting in clear truths about reality. Descartes also argued that everything we know is either a thing, an affection of a thing, or an eternal truth (1644, p. XLVIII). Furthermore, he believed that we can conceive of physical substance without the actual object, but the opposite is not true—thus the truth lies only in the mind (Descartes, 1644, p. LIII). And relatively recently, Skinner (1971) argued that truth can be found only in directly observable behaviors.
Fortunately these rigid definitions have yielded to a more accommodating and subjective view of truth. Locke believed that in "searches after truth...the very pursuit makes a great part of the pleasure. Every step the mind takes in its progress towards knowledge makes some discovery, which is not only new, but the best too, for the time at least” (1689, p. 1). James presented his view of instrumental truth, or “the view that truth in our ideas means their power to ‘work’” (1907, p. 43). He also supported the subjectivity of truth in citing the ideas of Schiller and Dewey who argued that “…ideas become true just in so far as they help us to get into satisfactory relation with other parts of our experience” (James, 1907, p. 23). Women’s perspective on knowing, as described by Belenky, Goldberger, Clinchy, and Tarule (1986), presented the concept of subjective knowledge which encourages the development of one’s instinct and intuition as a means of being able to define one’s own truth. “Truth, for subjective knowers, is an intuitive reaction [where one is] not...part of the process, as constructor of truth, but as conduit through which truth emerges” (Belenky et al., 1986, p. 69). Subjective knowledge means less reliance on restrictive dualistic thinking of absolutes, and embraces what the authors call “connected knowing, an orientation toward understanding and truth that emphasizes not autonomy and independence of judgment, but a joining of minds” (Belenky et al., 1986, p. 55). Nonaka and Takeuchi asserted that “organizational intention provides the most important criterion for judging the truthfulness of a given piece of knowledge…intention is often expressed by organizational standards or visions that can be used to evaluate and justify the created knowledge” (1995, p. 74). Drucker also took an accommodating view of truth, stating “All knowledges are equally valuable; all knowledges, in the words of the great medieval saint and philosopher St. Bonaventura, lead equally to the truth” (1993, p. 218).
Guiding Principle 4: Learning is most effective when it involves elements of both practice/doing and theory/thinking
Through their study of knowledge, the epistemological philosophers also contributed their beliefs about how learning can be most effective—and many argued for including elements of both practice/doing and theory/thinking. Descartes (1644) argued for steps to educate oneself that included both intellectual pursuits and practice as a means to apply morals and logic. Kant (1803/1960) argued for methods designed to train both the mind and the body. He believed the mind should be trained (1) through both physical and moral training, (2) with an eye to the end goal—is it for work (scholastic culture) or play (free culture); (3) to maximize memory skills early and cultivate understanding; and (4) with rules alongside application and examples. Kant also believed that the body should be trained through (1) active doing to combine skill and senses; (2) developing a photographic memory (to be used in nature as well as in books and music); and (3) using childhood games to prepare children for the future and condition them to remain busy and work toward an end goal (1803/1960). Rousseau (1762/1957) argued for learning through experience first and then proceeding to mental reasoning. He believed that it is best to teach through doing whenever possible, and only fall back upon words when doing is out of the question. Rousseau also emphasized the need for experienced-based self-directed learning stating:
Let the senses be the only guide for the first workings of reason… The child who reads ceases to think, he only reads. He is acquiring words not knowledge. [Rather] teach the scholar to observe the phenomena of nature… Put the problems before him and let him solve them himself. Let him know nothing because you have told him, but because he has learnt it for himself. (1762/1957, p. 131)
Late 20th century philosophers continued to support the idea of effective learning needing both practice/doing and thinking/theory. Rogers encouraged us to remember that learning is both intellectual and behavioral by stating, “It is not simply an intellectual value choice, but seems to be the description of the…behaviors by which [the learner] moves exploringly toward what he wants to be” (1961, p. 176). Skinner’s operant conditioning involved the breaking down of learning into small pieces, and then providing both instruction and practice (along with reinforcement) on each piece (1971). Schon stated, “rigorous professional practitioners solve well-formed instrumental problems by applying [both] theory and technique” (1987, pp. 3-4). He argued for practical knowledge providing experience and skill in problem solving—resulting in the artistry by which the seasoned professional practices a trade. Practical knowledge also provides the opportunity to build what Schon termed ‘knowledge-in-action’—the ability to apply tacit knowledge and make wise judgments in the light of new problems and situations (1987, pp. 23-25). He also recommended the use of practical experience that can provide the opportunity for ‘reflection in action’—a series of evaluations, learnings, and modifications that are made in the midst of practice (Schon, 1987, pp. 26-29). Schwab (1971) also argued in support of the need for both theory and practical application. He asserted that theory knowledge provides the legitimacy of facts, rules, and concepts founded upon research; however, theory alone—with its inherent generality—is not enough for today’s professionals since practice requires the concrete and particular.
More recent philosophers have brought the concept of learning through both practice/doing and thinking/theory into the mainstream. Drucker himself criticized the traditional liberal arts education (typically grounded in theory), stating that this form of education “does not enable [students] to understand reality, let alone to master it” (1993, p. 213). He argued that what is needed instead is a blending of theory and doing, being able to live and work in both the worlds “of the ‘intellectual’ who focuses on words and ideas, and that of the ‘manager’ who focuses on people and work;” by having both, “there can be creativity and order, fulfillment and mission” (Drucker, 1993, p. 215). Senge introduced “the five disciplines [that] represent approaches (theories) and methods [practices] for developing three core learning capabilities: fostering aspiration, developing reflective conversation, and understanding complexity” resulting in what he calls ‘generative learning’ or enhancing the capacity to create (2006, pp. xiii, 14). Furthermore, Senge cautioned that “we learn best from experience, but [if] we never directly experience the consequences of our most important decisions” we will be limited in what can be learned from that experience (2006, p. 23). Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) also embraced a holistic method of learning, believing that learning provides an opportunity to internalize knowledge and convert from explicit to tacit knowledge. They argued that sometimes learning by doing is the best method—what they termed ‘re-experiencing’ others’ experiences—and believed that other times hearing or reading of others’ experiences works equally well (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995, pp. 69-70).
To be continued...
- Robin
Performance Associates, Inc.
