Gratitude, the question of science and common sense
22
Jan
A person may be grateful without understanding the goals of gratitude, but
they will not understand the goals if they do not know the true motivations of gratitude, that is, remaining in gratitude can be free of knowledge, but have gratitude (make it a habit healthy) requires going beyond the simple gratuitous act, knowing it and cultivating it to work in society.
Thus, it is necessary to separate appreciable common sense from objective knowledge, which is to dissect the object of knowledge that can be done both inductively and intuitively, both paths are valid, so it is not necessary conventional but intentional science.
To talk about science we need to talk about Karl Popper, he also speculated about being things, said about common sense is valid, but upholding the truths of it is something bigger. But objective knowledge, he said, was an eternal pursuit of his life, in his words: “The essays in this book break with a tradition that can be traced back to Aristotle – the tradition of this common sense theory of knowledge.
I am a great admirer of common sense, which I claim is essentially self-critical ”, But to uphold it as truth requires more: “… if I am willing to uphold to the end the essential truth of common sense realism, I regard the common sense theory of knowledge as a subjectivist blunder.
This blunder has dominated Western philosophy, ”as understood by feelings, passions, and even sustaining nonobjective questions.
He goes on: “I have been trying to eradicate it and replace it with an objective theory of knowledge, essentially conjectural. This may be a bold claim, but I do not apologize for it ” (Popper, 1975, p. 07).
Popper’s division into three worlds shows a weakness in his theory by separating knowledge into three worlds: P1 the world of nature (or physical in the sense of physis), the world of minds (World 2) and the world of ideas (World 3), prioritizes the latter.
In a solution to a problem, people can attack or accept the solution found, but not the person who presented it, so it gives a greater value than the world of ideas (World 3) has to Popper, rather than the World of minds (World 2) who developed them.
Gratitude is just the opposite, because the minds that develop solutions to the problem (World 2) are more important than the ideas that drive them (World 3), although subjectivism, which is proper to the subject, may also have weaknesses.
What embraces these three distinct aspects: Nature, Knowledge and Ideas, are ontological aspects, for the three are proper to Being, gratitude is one of these aspects.
In times of a pandemic vaccine, it is good to remember Popper because he said that what can be refuted is scientific, and what we today is an “affirmation” or “denial” about vaccine, both is anti-scientific, the longer tests is need.
Popper, K. (1975) Conhecimento objetivo (Objective Knowledge). Brazil, São Paulo: Editora da Universidade de São Paulo.
