Theme 1: Theory of knowledge and theory of science

In preparation for the theme theory of knowledge and theory of science I read Teaetetus by Plato and the preface to the second edition of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason.

In Theaetetus, Socrates discusses the nature of knowledge with the young Theaetetus. Theaetetus' first definition of knowledge is perception or sensation. He agrees that men see and hear 'with the eyes and with the ears'. But Socrates leads Theaetetus to the conclusion that this statement is incorrect and one should rather say that 'we see or hear […] through the eyes and through the ears'. There is a delicate difference between the meanings of 'with' and 'through'. By saying that something is done 'with' an object, the object becomes an independent tool. But if you do something 'through' an object, then the expression indicates that a kind of reflexion is done while using the object. You not only use the object but you process and interpret the information you have gained with the object. Socrates says that using 'with' in this context would imply that the senses were like unconnected parts in a 'Trojan horse'. So if our organs would only be loose objects in our body, working independently and without a connection to the others, we would be nothing more than a lifeless, wooden shell. If we assume that the underlying mechanism of sensation in every organ works in the same way, then every man would precept exactly the same without further processing. If this would be true than Theaetetus' statement that 'knowledge is perception' would be true as well. But this is not the case as we see not 'with' but 'through' our eyes. If two people look at the same thing they might not percept the same. This is because the information they gain through their senses is interpreted by 'the mind' - the centrum where sensations are brought together and interpreted based on earlier experience.
The empiricism states that knowledge is created by perception combined with experience [Cf. Curd, Martin, and Stathis Psillos. The Routledge companion to philosophy of science. Routledge, 2013. Pp. 129–138]. This definition is similar to the one given by Socrates when he emphasizes the importance of seeing and hearing 'through' eyes and ears. Since we gain information through sensation, knowledge can only be formed by processing the sensation and is stored as some reflected version of the sensation. Sensation without experience is the same as seeing and hearing ‚with‘ and not ‚through‘ the eyes and ears.

In the preface to the second edition of Critique of Pure Reason Kant introduces the concept of pure reason. Pure reason is a knowledge which is created by imagination and logic. It is formed a priori which means that it is formed without sensation. Kant believes pure reason to be the key to gain new understandings. But 'all our attempts to establish something about them a priori […] have come to nothing'. At the time Kant was writing Critque on Pure Reason most attempts of gaining knowledge a priori have failed. Kant believes that this is due to us thinking that 'all our cognition must conform to objects' instead of 'that objects must conform to our cognition.' The meaning of it can be illustrated best by an example. If we would examine water in its different states and try to recognize the water conforming to it as an object, then we may only see ice or a liquid. But if we would try to recognize the water conforming to our cognition we might get some ideas about the real character of the water which may lead to a more abstract cognition of the water - the atom model. So Kant wants to express that it might not be possible to understand the real nature of an object by perception but by reasoning.

As a scientist I believe that both kinds of knowledge play an important role in our learning process. It is important to gain knowledge through sensation and to question its quality. But it may be even more important to gain knowledge through imagination and logic - the pure reason. Because this is how new ideas can arise. I guess that is what Einstein meant with his statement: 'Imagination is more important than knowledge' [A.F. Osborn, Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Problem-Solving. Charles Scribner’s Sons. Bombay, 1985.].