Anna Johnson- Section 10

Section 10 Me: I’m really concerned for society today. The world is filled with falsehoods, superstition, selfishness, polarization, partisanship, and mutual hostility based on differences of race, religion, ethnicity, nationality belief, etc. Can we use philosophy to overcome this?

Warburton: When we look at Kant’s work we realize that we’re not able to see reality the way that it truly is. All of what we can sense of the world is what Kant refers to as the “phenomenal” world. In contrast, the “noumenal” world is what exists on a deeper level and is true reality. Using the power of reason and philosophy, we can figure out the filters our perceptions are putting on reality and get through to the truth (114). Because of this, we can use philosophy to avoid falling for these follies of logic to be able to see past our prejudices. Kant is one example of a philosopher trying to work out how to differentiate real truths from what we perceive.

Baggini: I definitely agree with Kant, all experiences are just experiences, you can’t strip away the filters your mind uses to perceive the world(35). Studying his works allows us to seek truth and understand what is prohibiting us from seeing the world how it actually is. With this understanding we can overcome the falsehoods which lead to prejudices, bringing the world together. We must find ways of relating to the world more directly and without the filters of our prejudices.

Andersen: In the U.S., early in the 20th century, major prejudices began to grow against Catholics and Jews when each group’s population size had grown to around 2% of the nation’s population (119). The fact that the groups only started facing hostility when their population reached that certain proportion shows that the discrimination wasn’t based on any real actions or behaviors by these groups. Instead, the public’s negative perceptions had just arisen because their imagined threshold for “too many” of those types of people had been reached. This demonstrates what you all and Kant are asserting. We must analyze why a growth in a religious group’s population to this certain percentage makes the majority form hostile prejudices against them. We can use philosophy and reason to overcome this by realizing that our perceived threat is not reality.

Me: Interesting points. Although Kant spends a lot of time thinking from his armchair, we can certainly use his insight to create a clearer perception of reality and avoid falling for bad logic which leads to these unjust prejudices. William James posed the questions, “What is this world going to be? What is life eventually to make of itself?” Any thoughts on this?

Andersen: We are currently living in a post-truth society. People have become too focused on what feels true that we’ve lost the importance of what actually is true. At least for the U.S., I have grave concerns about our future. It’s not that we don’t have good information, it’s that we reject it.

Me: I remember in your book you referenced Stephen Colbert’s comedy bit about the phenomenon of “truthiness.” I’d like to share his more recent updated version, this time his word is, “Trumpiness.” He asserts that, “truthiness has to feel true, but 'Trumpiness' doesn’t even have to do that.” He then cites an article that states that many of his supporters don’t even believe his wildest promises and they don’t care. Like you, I struggle with where we can go from here, but I still hold on to my hope that we can find a way back to working for our future.

Baggini: Instead of believing the truth belongs in a separate reality, William James believed reality could be found through the convergence of society’s truths (84). If we follow pragmatist’s beliefs we can continue to improve our perception of reality by continuing to research our ideas and merge them with one another. In this view, the world is constantly working towards the truth together as one.

Warburton: Georg W.F. Hegel believed in Kant’s assertion that the noumenal reality is beyond what we experience in the phenomenal reality. However, he believed our filtered reality is what reality is. He believed that we could seek truth with the continued process of clashing opposing ideas to reach a synthesis to then continue to clash with other ideas (129). The synthesis which Hegel seeks is similar to the convergence which James emphasizes. Our reality is a work in progress which we must meld with one another to decrease the confusing affects our perceptions can have on what we think to be true.

Me: When we study philosophy we realize that many things about our very basic assumptions about the world are wrong or not detailed enough. As far as where the world is headed, the best case scenario is that we continue on with less suffering and more understanding. To achieve this we can’t rely on our perceptions as they can lead us astray into harmful prejudices. Instead we must practice logic and understanding to see past our filtered views. If successful, our existence will progress and thrive.