Metaphysics

Veruska M. B. November 18, 2011 TOK Mr. de Silva Grade 11 OSC TOK Essay: How do Perception and Emotion Contribute to our Knowledge of the World? Perception is broad concept, often defined through various contexts. Similarly, emotion has assorted definitions. These concepts differ in their timing in the world, for without the initial perception, emotion is a non-existent concept. And without such commodities our knowledge of the world would cease to exist. For our perception and emotion influences the other ways of knowing (WOK) immensely such as reason and language.

Perception is how we perceive our surroundings, and the world. It’s often defined in 5 stages: The sensing process, integration, analysis, reaction and decision-making. However, emotion comes into play in the analysis, the reaction and the decision-making. The sensing process happens in one of five ways: with our five senses of sight, taste, smell, touch and hearing (Thinking positive). Integration is what is “filtered in and what is filtered out”. After this filtering you become aware of the environment and you explore/interpret the vicinity to give meaning and context differing on individuality.

Then, we are convinced that if we can hear it, see it, smell it, taste it, feel it- it must be true. This is a common notion of a way of “knowing” something. Nonetheless, perception is key in its contribution towards our knowledge of the world. Considering that perception is the “supporting” evidence we obtain to identify with things around us, to categorize morals/ideas and to contribute towards our reactions on those morals/ideas. The reaction of perception interlinks with the abstraction of emotion.

Emotion is defined as “a mental state that arises spontaneously rather than through conscious effort and is often accompanied by physiological changes” (Define: Emotion). There are 6 basic emotions that all emotions fall under: happiness, sadness, anger, surprise, disgust, and fear. These emotions affect our knowledge of the world, as it taints our perception. Giving our knowledge obscurity. Such obscurities in knowledge are evident in various areas of knowledge (AOK) when emotion and perception intervene.

A major AOK emotion and perception impact is the Arts. Visual Art is an IB subject that can alter our knowledge and ideas. As an aspiring IB artist, I’m emotional with my art. I use color and texture to communicate broad ideas. When I was painting my expressionism self-portrait, I couldn’t find the right colors to develop, and found myself frustrated. This emotion drove me to shut the judgment of others out, raise my heartbeat; gather paints and a palette knife and paint my frustration. Before I knew it, I had created a piece.

Now I understood something new: That great artists don’t paint by assignment, the art is a spontaneous work that is triggered by an emotion brought on by perception, whether that is perception of doing something wrong which leads to a primary emotion, or perceiving a landscape which triggers an emotion that is then integrated into an art piece. Another contribution to my knowledge based on perception and emotion was a personal experience I had 6 years ago on December 9th. It was the day my friend Simon died. I was sitting at the dinner table when my parents received a call from Simon’s mother.

My parents told me that Simon had been in a car crash with a drunk driver; they had hit a passing car on the way home from a party. I was listening to them communicate this clearly, trying to comprehend what they were saying, but my emotions kicked in. My initial response was anger, yelling at my mother that she was wrong, that what she was telling me was a lie, that Monday I’d walk from the bus stop with him. My emotion of sadness, led me to believe that my mother must be lying to me, because the sadness and anger obscured the truth. I was so absorbed in emotion and denial.

On Monday, I waited at the bus stop and missed two of my classes. My judgment was so clouded; I simply rejected my perception, my knowledge, because of my strong emotion. Because of all the happiness Simon brought me, I could not let him go. Having it been so long ago now, I have a different emotional response whenever Simon is brought up. The emotion of sadness is still there, but it does not cloud the knowledge I gained from the experience of the loss. In conclusion, perception and emotion contribute to our knowledge of the world, in both its filtering of knowledge, and its positive reaction.

Emotion and perception can both suppress knowledge not wanting to be obtained in a moment of strong emotion. But it can also be a strong positive influence in an area of creativity and individuality. The examples of art class and the death of Simon both exemplify such occurrences in my knowledge of the world. Works Cited Brennan, Samantha. “Thinking Positive”. Perception and Intuition, a life long challenge. http://www. positive-thinking-principles. com/definition-of-perception. html “Definition of Emotion”. Answers. Com. http://www. answers. com/topic/emotion | |

I believe that beauty Is In the eye of the beholder. What one person would consider a flaw; another might think it an adorable quirk. Since no one is Identical, this means there’s no true definition of beauty. It’s all based on our perception. First of all, the way we perceive beauty Is affected largely by the media. Growing up In a heavily media Influenced culture; many people believe that being beautiful Is synonymous to being “hot”.

In movies, the ugly” girl rarely ever “gets the guy’. The way television portrays beauty Is wrong, and hurtful, because It reinforces the Idea that to be beautiful, you must be attractive. Beauty Is more than Just skin deep. The word “beautiful” encompasses the mind and soul of a person, not Just their body and face. Regardless, people may argue that the meaning of beauty Is Ingrained In us biologically. What we find “naturally attractive” helps us define who an Ideal mate would be.

But now that the arrival of our race doesn’t depend on our reproduction, we can redefine the definition of beauty to suit our psychological needs. People have ruined their health and taken unnecessary risks, since they’re willing to do whatever it takes to be “beautiful. ” In conclusion, saying that beauty is in the eye of the beholder would embrace the fact that there are infinite definitions for this word. For this reason, I celebrate that beauty is more than what is merely on the outside.

The Oxford English dictionary definition of a sceptic is “a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinions”. Scepticism is a doctrine that was followed seriously first by Pyrrho, who believed that the true way to find peace was to avoid dogmatising and to live life with no set beliefs. Nussbaum sums this up in The Therapy of Desire as the belief that ‘to every argument another argument of equal strength is opposed’.

Therefore it is impossible to decide on one argument, and true inner peace is found by accepting this and allowing yourself to simply exist, acting only on your instincts and senses. A Sceptic would not assert “the sky is blue” but rather would say “the sky appears to be blue”. However, even Pyrhho struggled to stick to scepticism, saying that we would have to “altogether divest ourselves of the human being” to live completely as a Sceptic. So the question must be asked: is it impossible to live without opinions?

From the outset it seems that society, particularly modern society, is built on the assumption that we all have beliefs, even if only fundamental ethical beliefs, for example the assumption that murder is wrong. We are brought up with set ethical beliefs before we are old enough to philosophise for ourselves, and it is this social conditioning that allows us as humans to live without the constant threat of being murdered hanging over our heads. Indeed, those that choose not to live by these fundamental social rules are often institutionalised, either in mental facilities or in prisons.

Although these beliefs change and vary over time and in different world cultures (for example, it was common for promiscuous girls to be mentally institutionalised in the 1960s, whereas now that practice would be shocking to most) most societies define themselves by their beliefs, either religious or cultural. The most strong and consistent belief system that has pned over time and continents is the belief that without strong ethical principles, the world would turn to chaos. Moreover, it is impossible to ignore that life often depends on making decisions. We must almost every day decide on what would be the best course of action.

When we wake up we decide whether to stay in bed for the rest of the day or to wake up and carry out whichever activities we had planned. After breakfast we decide whether to do the washing up immediately or to leave it for later. Sceptics argue that we must be led by our senses and instincts, as well as by necessity and the laws and customs of our land. This addresses concerns about the possibility of the world collapsing into anarchy without any set ethical beliefs, but then if the whole world practiced scepticism, there would be no laws and customs of the land to adhere to.

If someone in this sort of society felt a natural instinct to murder every day, there would be nobody who would decide that this was wrong and so find a way to stop this person from killing. After the fall of Baghdad to coalition troops in the Iraq war widespread looting took place. This sort of natural, instinctive reaction to the absence of strict laws and belief systems shows all too clearly the impossibility of a universal imposition of pyrrhonian principles.

Another important factor to remember when discussing Scepticism is the thought that, by asserting that scepticism is the best way to live, sceptics themselves are dogmatising. “Sextus cannot have a single definite procedure without having some values”-, “How can Skeptism be anything, one might ask, if the Skeptic has no beliefs? “- Nussbaum) Sceptics counter this with the idea that Scepticism isn’t a fixed doctrine, but a natural inclination, an instinct. They are flexible in their beliefs, allowing them to be questioned too. Therefore they escape the accusation that Scepticism in itself is a belief system. However, it is still difficult to apply this theory to the average human being.

We would have to un-learn our tendency to be dependent on our beliefs and re-condition ourselves in the ways of Pyrrhonism. This would take time and demand motivation and rigid training of the mind- far from a natural instinct. However, it is also possible to argue that, regardless of the difficulty, it is impossible in this world to find peace without having sceptical beliefs. Take the example of a fictional dogmatic. He is confused about how best to find happiness, and so takes up philosophy in the hope of discovering the truth and therefore live a happy life.

After many months of enquiry, he comes to a conclusion and so sets out a guideline for himself, to help him work out on a daily basis what to do to keep himself happy. He happily carries on his life under these new guidelines, until he comes across someone who argues with him about the way he lives his life. A seed of doubt is placed in his mind and he is confused and angry. He is now no longer happy. Scepticism would mean that our man would never have had to go through this cycle. He would have inquired into happiness but kept an open mind.

Now imagine that the guidelines that he had decided on in the first place had been wrong and after many months of living by them he was not happy at all, though he thought he was because he had never experienced true happiness. By not dogmatising he could have avoided becoming arrogant for no reason. Another argument for scepticism is that of human suffering. It cannot be denied that humans, dogmatists and sceptics alike, will experience suffering in their lives. However it is their reaction to it and the significance they place on it that determines how much the pain affects them.

Pyrrho believed that, by theorising about pain and suffering, and imagining it as some kind of evil, people increased the level to which they felt their pain. Sceptics accept that they feel pain and that this is natural, but do not have any particular theories about it, and therefore achieve peace. However, although the benefits of scepticism seem ideal, this does not remove the difficulties of applying it to every day life. As an ideology, a level of scepticism applied to every day life would perhaps make people happier and better adjusted.

People would be less prepared to accept false theories dogmatically, always remembering that an apposing argument could be just as valid. They would not be fixated on their suffering and try to create reasons for it, but instead would “relax and let life happen to [them]”, and by relaxing would live happier, more fulfilled lives. But scepticism applied fully would be impractical, as we could have no assurances of safety, and the effort it would take to re-condition our entire way of life would be too great.

The Republic of Plato as parasols the justice of a censored society which, in reading The Republic as a philosophical treatise, is not surprising. Quotes abound in The Republic supporting this claim, such as “we must supervise the makers of tales; and if they make a fine tale, it must be approved, but if it’s not, it must be rejected. We’ll persuade nurses and mothers to tell the approved tales to their children and to shape their souls with tales more than their bodies with hands. Most of those they now tell must be thrown out. Bloom, Bibb)’ Through-out the education of the guardians of the city within The Republic, Socrates restricts the poets and story tellers more and more, tossing out what ever would seem to harm his perfectly Just city or diminish the patriotism of those living within. It comes as no surprise that the casual reader may have qualms with this extreme censorship of the artist and what they are permitted to create. A closer reading and an Idea of the social significance of the artist 2500 years ago, seems to reveal a different Intent to Socrates seemingly stubborn pollen of art.

Plato was an artist himself, writing beautiful dramatic dialogues, which are most unlike the more modern philosophers like Kant or Hegel who write philosophical treatise. This distinction becomes important in how Plato Is read in comparison to other philosophers. In the mainstream philosophy of our time the most common way to read a philosopher’s writing is through a collection of excerpts from many writers on a certain topic. These books are great for getting a lot of different views but unfortunately they destroy the messages contained in non philosophical treatise type writing, such as Plat’s.

Flats writing can not be taken out of context with excerpts. It would be Like taking Machete’s speech from Shakespeare play Macbeth and saying that Is Shakespearean philosophy on the meaning of life, It simply does not do Justice to the writer and their work. The Republic Is about searching for Justice In the human soul, it is also about leading Glaucoma away from a political life because he has a possibly tyrannical soul (Palmer, 33-34)2. The arguments used to bring about these two points cannot be taken out of context from the book to portray a different theory of Plates.

The prejudices against Plates philosophical writings usually come from taking an excerpt and applying logical analysis to prove his arguments invalid which simply displays a lack of understanding of how Plato writes. How Socrates came to talk to those in the dialogues, why he is talking to them, and what is not said is Just as important as what Is said in the Platonic dialogues, they are all dramas and should be read as such. Now that we have some reasons for doubting the common criticism of Plates views on art from The Republic.

I would like to demonstrate specific reasons for doubting sides to bring about the perfectly Just city in speech and follow up with Socrates own criticism of this city and his reasons for doubting its relevance. The city in speech brought about with The Republic begins with the end of Socrates seeming refutation of Trashcans which Glaucoma rejects and restates the argument for further scrutiny (AAA-361 d). The argument is over whether it is a better life to live perfectly Just or perfectly unjust.

Glaucoma states the argument as such “For I desire to hear what each is and what power it has all alone by itself when t is in the soul”dismissing its wages and its consequences. “(Bloom, Bibb) After some convincing, Socrates accepts the challenge to defend Justice (ICC). In taking on this feet, Socrates contrives an easier way to spot Justice in the soul. He claims that justice in the soul is like small letters and hard to see while Justice in a city is like big letters and will be easier to see (ICC-d). So Socrates sets out to creating a perfectly just city in speech to flush out Justice in the soul.

Whether or not this is a decent attempt to find Justice will be dealt with later by Socrates himself. The first city created, or the first stage of the city, is based on a “city of utmost necessity’ and grows only to the size of a small city (Palmer, 16; Bibb-371 b). Glaucoma rejects this simple city and wants one with more luxury (ICC-d). Socrates believes the first city created was the true and healthy city but he agrees to create a “feverish” city (IEEE). This forces the city to grow much larger and to take land away from neighbors to support it and, in doing so the city will need an army (37th-e).

Attendants urges for a discussion of how these “guardians” of the city will be educated and reluctantly Socrates accepts and says like men telling myths within a myth we will educate the guardians (Palmer, 16; 37th). Socrates, in his own creation of this city in speech, is claiming here that he is telling a myth, and further, that the education of the guardians is a myth within a myth. This, ironically, is the beginning of the education of the guardians in which Socrates brings about his famed censorship.

Socrates continues to give clues to his disapproval of his own argument, as if he is just putting on a show at this point. After discovering Justice in the city, Socrates ants to find out if it corresponds to Justice in the soul, remember the big and small letters. Socrates says “We were, I believe, saying that in order to get to the finest possible look at these things another and longer road around would be required, and to the man who took it they would become evident, but that proofs on a level with what had been said up to then could be tacked on.

And you all said that would suffice. And so, you see, the statements made at that time were, as it looks to me, deficient in precision. If they were satisfactory to you, only you can tell. “(Bloom, Bibb; n reference to Dodd) Amazingly, Glaucoma accepts what Socrates called a deficient argument on both occasions, although the serious reader probably should not. (As Palmer, 23, remarks: “Heretofore, the arguments were so lacking in precision that they may have been without any value whatsoever (AAA-b). ) Socrates to tell how it could come into being (471 c-e). Glaucoma forgets, as most readers do, that the city was not created for the purpose of creating a city but for discovering Justice in the human soul. Socrates reminds him, in length, of his mistake and what the true purpose of the city is (Bibb-Bibb). Glaucoma’s demand that the good city in speech be realized measures exactly the degree to which he has not understood the Republic. (Penetrate, 123)3 As seems to be true for anyone who believes Socrates was trying to create a true city, and therefore, any regulations Socrates makes within this city. Further evidence for this is evident later on when Glaucoma declares that the philosophers will not mind the business of politics because he finally understands the nonsensical nature of the city. But, Socrates again reminds him of what they were really talking about and that the philosopher will mind the equines of the city within himself, he will mind the business of his own soul (Palmer, 32).

Although the city in speech within The Republic does not seem to represent a real city and should not be taken as a literal attempt to create a perfectly Just city in reality, the fact remains that Plato does seem to be very hard on the artist, especially the poets. The image of the cave sets up mankind as looking at the shadows of artifacts displayed on the wall of a cave by the poets (Palmer, 28; AAA-51 AAA). This gives good reason for Socrates being so hard on them in the creation of the city in beech if the poets are the ones deceiving mankind.

Today, of course, poets are not an influence on political life and it would seem ridiculous to accuse them of writing false poems. In Athens and ancient Greek culture, the poets were a major influence. They were the authority on the gods and on virtue. In fact, they were the only authority that would be quoted in a trial or by a representative of the people. They would be very well known by almost all inhabitants of Athens. “The poets are the unacknowledged legislators of mankind” (Penetrate, 223). It was not the arts homeless which Plato was attacking but their significance in politics.

Plato was attempting to replace the poet’s authority with the authority of philosophy or of reason, which would seem most natural to anyone today. Plat’s true intent in his criticism of the poets is brought up later on in The Republic when in book X he attacks Homer specifically. He compares Homer to the likes of an artisan that makes objects or anything he wants including gods through representation (ICC). Glaucoma claims that this man could only be a sophist (59th). The implicit problem that Socrates poses with the poet is that he does not give an explanation of himself.

Homer talks about virtuous people and the fantastic deeds they do but these heroes do not praise the poets for their deeds. The poet seems to have no place in his own writing and their “Speech seems to be subordinate to the deed. ” Of the people they are praising (Bloom, 430). Socrates claims that the poet is an imitator of an imitator, in that, the poet appeals to the people and what they want and is only popular if they approve, he must follow the popular view. The people’s view is shaped by the legislator who lays down laws in view of what he believes would be natural law (Bloom, 432).

Ethics Paper Week 1 Assignment Rheana Willis 01/08/2012 Dilemma Choice 2: A married couple, both addicted to drugs, are unable to care for their infant daughter. She is taken from them by court order and placed in a foster home. The years pass. She comes to regard her foster parents as her real parents. They love her as they would their own daughter. When the child is 9 years old, the natural parents, rehabilitated from drugs, begin court action to regain custody. The case is decided in their favor. The child is returned to them, against her will. Does ethics support the law in this case? Discuss.

Ethics, also known as moral philosophy, is a branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. Major branches of ethics include: Meta-ethics, about the theoretical meaning and reference of moral propositions and how their truth values (if any) may be determined; Normative ethics, about the practical means of determining a moral course of action; Applied ethics, about how moral outcomes can be achieved in specific situations; Within each of these branches are many different schools of thought and still further sub-fields of study.

For this particular dilemma I chose Normative ethics and Applied ethics to solve and clarify the decision making process. Normative ethics is the study of ethical action. It is the branch of philosophical ethics that investigates the set of questions that arise when considering how one ought to act, morally speaking. Normative ethics is distinct from meta-ethics because it examines standards for the rightness and wrongness of actions, while meta-ethics studies the meaning of moral language and the metaphysics of moral facts.

Normative ethics is also distinct from descriptive ethics, as the latter is an empirical investigation of people’s moral beliefs. To put it another way, descriptive ethics would be concerned with determining what proportion of people believe that killing is always wrong, while normative ethics is concerned with whether it is correct to hold such a belief. Hence, normative ethics is sometimes said to be prescriptive, rather than descriptive.

Using this method of choice to solve this dilemma would mean that both the foster parents and the rehabilitated parents would have to come up with an agreement in which the child is seeing both her real parents and her foster parents until she is comfortable to move in with her real parents permanently. That would mean that both parents would have to set aside their differences for the sake of the child and work on having unity together.

Applied ethics is, in the words of Brenda Almond, co-founder of the Society for Applied Philosophy, “the philosophical examination, from a moral standpoint, of particular issues in private and public life that are matters of moral judgment”. It is thus a term used to describe attempts to use philosophical methods to identify the morally correct course of action in various fields of human life. Applied ethics is distinguished from normative ethics, which concerns what people should believe to be right and wrong, and from meta-ethics, which concerns the nature of moral statements.

Morally in this situation when using applied ethics, you solve the dilemma by act-utilitarianism. If raising their child on their own without involving the foster parents produces greater benefit than disbenefit, then, according to act-utilitarianism, it would be morally acceptable to do so, even if the child has been raised by them the first nine years of her life. Unfortunately, there are perhaps hundreds of rival normative principles from which to choose, many of which yield opposite conclusions.

Thus, the stalemate in normative ethics between conflicting theories prevents us from using a single decisive procedure for determining the morality of a specific issue. The usual solution today to this stalemate is to consult several representative normative principles on a given issue and see where the weight of the evidence lies. When using Normative ethics to solve the dilemma it involves arriving at moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct.

In a sense, it is a search for an ideal litmus test of proper behavior. The Golden Rule is a classic example of a normative principle: We should do to others what we would want others to do to us. In Applied ethics resolving issues is easier based on consulting our normative principle of choice, such as act-utilitarianism, where if it’s going to benefit the parents to raise her on their own then they are acting morally by doing so.

The only similarities between the two ethics are that normative ethic principles can go hand and hand with applied ethics, for instance: commonly appealed to in applied ethical discussions: * Personal benefit: acknowledge the extent to which an action produces beneficial consequences for the individual in question. * Social benefit: acknowledge the extent to which an action produces beneficial consequences for society. * Principle of benevolence: help those in need. Principle of paternalism: assist others in pursuing their best interests when they cannot do so themselves. * Principle of harm: do not harm others. * Principle of honesty: do not deceive others. * Principle of lawfulness: do not violate the law. * Principle of autonomy: acknowledge a person’s freedom over his/her actions or physical body. * Principle of justice: acknowledge a person’s right to due process, fair compensation for harm done, and fair distribution of benefits. Rights: acknowledge a person’s rights to life, information, privacy, free expression, and safety I feel like these two school of ethics are better explained in real-life dilemmas because not only do they give you a better sense of what’s right or wrong but also different perspectives on how to reach a moral and ethical decision. Aristotle would have approved of the decision made using normative ethics because ethics is a practical rather than a theoretical science; he also gave careful consideration to the aspects of human nature involved in acting and accepting moral responsibility.

Although the virtues are habits of acting or dispositions to act in certain ways, Aristotle maintained that these habits are acquired by engaging in proper conduct on specific occasions and that doing so requires thinking about what one does in a specific way. This is the function of deliberative reasoning: to consider each of the many actions that are within one’s power to perform, considering the extent to which each of them would contribute to the achievement of the appropriate goal or end, making a deliberate choice to act in the way that best fits that end, and then voluntarily engaging in the action itself.

References 1) Kemerling, F. (11). Philosophy pages. Retrieved from http://www. philosophypages. com/hy/2s. htm 2) Wikimedia Foundation, I. (n. d. ). Applied ethics. Retrieved from http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Applied_ethics 3) Wikepedia. (2011, 12 07). Retrieved from http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Ethics 4) Fieser, J. (2003). Psychological issues in methaethics. In Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://www. iep. utm. edu/ethics

Running Head: ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 1 Organizational Epistemology St. Rachel E. Ustanny University of Phoenix ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 2

There are different perspectives about the origin of knowledge, which have influenced the development of concepts such as a priori and a posteriori truth, epistemic regress, and sensual perception—Descartes (as cited in Cooper, 1999) argued that there are certain undeniable truths, which are obtained from our senses; Feldman (2003) noted that truth is obtained through one of or a combination of six means: perception, memory, testimony, introspection, reasoning, and rational insight; Feldman (2003) also reported that evidentialists believe that propositions must be substantiated; Bonjour (1978) articulated that truth is based on the existence of a priori knowledge, which is proven by engaging in epistemic regress; Schnapper (2009) noted that modern democracy calls for greater equality, including the recognition and acceptance of all perspectives as truth; and Webb (2007) reported that truth is that which is naturally experienced. In light of these varying perspectives about the origin of truth or knowledge, one cannot deny that the study of epistemology is very important to the development of new information, and socioeconomic progress.

From an organizational perspective, epistemology provides a framework for critically analyzing and planning for the management and leadership of contemporary businesses—The change in the mode of production to that of knowledge work as reported by Drucker (1999) points to the need for contemporary organizational leaders to manage knowledge as a means of increasing productivity. This situation underscores the importance of deconstructing the origin of knowledge that workers produce on a daily basis. Epistemological Theories The multiple perspectives about the origin of knowledge have stimulated much criticism and skepticism about the validity and generalizability of epistemological theories. Nevertheless, this situation has continued to fuel the development of new theories, which have contributed to ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 3 the persistence of the epistemological debate over several centuries, and influenced its applicability to contemporary social problems.

New theories about the origin of knowledge are still emerging as society is faced with unique challenges and alternate ways of learning and testing validity. Natural epistemology and the knowledge work theories will be examined as a means of garnering a better understanding of how modern society deals with and conceptualizes knowledge and uses it to improve social structures and systems. Four longstanding knowledge theories will also be discussed to facilitate an evaluation of the influence of past knowledge theories on contemporary problems—these four theories are: empiricism, rationalism, pragmatism, and relativism. Naturalized epistemology challenged the belief that one has to engage in epistemic regress to justify truth.

It was proposed that truth is determined by scientific investigations and explanations (Feldman, 2003, p. 167). The tools, methods, and principles of science provide epistemologists with the means of testing and justifying knowledge, therefore machinery such as a lie detector enables contemporary investigators to examine individuals’ reactions (heartbeat, sweat production, and levels of anxiety) to determine if they are being truthful about a situation. This approach directly contradicts empiricism, which articulated that sensual perceptions enable human beings to determine truth. In this case, a lie detector would not be necessary to determine truth as the investigator would be able to use his or her senses to detect truth and untruth.

While there is some merit in the empiricists’ approach, naturalized epistemology presented a replicable method that is less likely to fail due to human error. Knowledge work as argued by Drucker (1999) represents a shift in the nature of production from being purely manual as was contended by management theorists of the 20 th century (p. 79). This shift has increased the significance of epistemology in the workplace in that ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 4 managers are forced to contend with the sources and origin of knowledge that workers possess as a means of enhancing companies’ capacities to improve the productivity of the knowledge worker as was done by Taylor during the heyday of manual work.

Knowledge work has challenged the society to come to terms with the importance of epistemology in everyday life and to find ways of optimizing it for development. Knowledge management is proposed by Wong and Aspinwall (2004) as a strategy for increasing the productivity of the knowledge worker, but despite this there are still challenges as it relates to those who possess tacit knowledge—the major concern for companies is the loss of productivity advances when the tacit knowledge worker leaves. It has therefore become increasingly important to find out how individuals gain knowledge in the first place, and then attempt to replicate those actions that are engaged in on a daily basis, which optimizes productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness.

One cannot solve the epistemological problems of the contemporary workplace without reflecting on earlier conceptions about epistemology as articulated by empiricists, rationalists, pragmatists, and relativists. Empiricism argued that knowledge is derived from human sensual experiences and perceptions (Cooper, 1999, p. 117). This view is quite the opposite of rationalism, which contended that knowledge existed (a priori) before humans experienced it; therefore individuals derived knowledge out of necessity, which is later universalized if there are no exceptions (Cooper, 1999, p. 166). Pragmatism challenged empiricism and rationalism by arguing that the a posteriori and a priori conceptions of truth are false because knowledge is derived from practice, which results in the formulation of theories and provides opportunities for continuously evising and reformulating the theory to improve practice (Webb, 2007, p. 10691070). Relativism opened up the epistemological discourse to multiple perspectives of truth, so that knowledge is seen as socially constructed, experiential, dynamic, and variable—There is no ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 5 single truth that guides the solution to problems and knowledge is gained from all of the various means articulated by individuals, thus the empiricist is no more correct than the rationalist, nor the pragmatist, nor the natural epistemologist. There is merit in all perspectives and all must be considered when seeking justifications for the truth (Schnapper, 2009, p. 177).

In light of the latter argument, management theorists must look to a wide range of epistemological perspectives to increase leaders’ understanding about knowledge work and how to increase its productivity. The tacit and explicit knowledge that workers possess is founded in first principles, as articulated by empiricists, and rationalists; as well as obtained from practice that the worker encounters as he or she carries out their duties—this (latter) pragmatic source indicates that each worker has the opportunity to discover truth in the execution of his or her duties. The fact that empiricism, rationalism, and pragmatism present valid perspectives about the sources of the knowledge worker’s knowledge indicates that there are multiple sources of truth, which contributes to the relativity of tacit knowledge work.

Application of Knowledge to Organizational Leadership and Management The shift in the 21st century from manual to knowledge work has necessitated that management theorists and leaders critically examine and develop means for measuring and increasing productivity. This has contributed to the need for increased attention to different forms of knowledge, particularly distinguishing tacit and explicit knowledge to enhance management theorists’ abilities to capture the steps and processes involved in producing specific outputs (Manyika, 1996). Tacit knowledge is particularly difficult to capture, because it is the know-how that individual workers possess that they acquired as a result of their experience with particular tools, and their responses to unique challenges that stimulated them to innovate. ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 6

Making tacit knowledge more public within organizations is critical to the improvement of productivity and succession planning—According to Ambrosini and Bowman (2001) “tacit knowledge in particular may block adaptation to changes in the environment, hinder innovation and lead to the continuation of inferior work practices” (p. 812). It requires that organizational leaders examine epistemological theories to get a better understanding of the foundation of the know-how that individual knowledge workers possess. Pragmatism is the epistemological theory that facilitates the most likely explanation for the origin of tacit knowledge in organizations as according to Ambrosini and Bowman (2001) “tacit knowledge is context specific, is typically acquired on the job or in the situation where it is used” (p. 13); so pragmatists’ belief that theory emerges from practice and is applied back to it with the possibility of revising and reformulating it presents an explanation of tacit knowledge originating in experiences as they are encountered. Senge (2010) and Drucker (1999) have been my most influential theorists because of the fact that their propositions have helped to explain and present solutions to the challenges facing my organization. They argued that there are methods that can be used to help increase productivity of knowledge workers in an ever-changing world, which are aimed at measuring and improving the contribution of knowledge to organizational success.

If companies fail to capture the tacit knowledge of workers, they are bound to face periods of slump when such workers leave the organization temporarily or permanently, as well as fail to make significant advances, because workers are not keeping abreast of new knowledge. The effective development of knowledge-based companies therefore depends on the implementation of strategies for standardizing and sharing such knowledge. In addition, there is a general need for the firm to control productivity so as to eliminate the possibility of being held at ransom by employees. ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 7 Converting companies to learning organizations was proposed by Senge (2010) as a means of increasing productivity and sharing knowledge.

Five disciplines were proposed for solving the productivity challenges that face contemporary organizations: personal mastery, mental models, shared visions, team learning, and systems thinking. It is believed that the learning organization sought to create holistic changes in companies so that knowledge could be better managed, and all stakeholders could see that success was dependent on the relationship among the individual departments and the organization as a corporate entity (p. 2). It is important to note that in the learning organization, the tacit knowledge and skills that workers possess, is represented by personal mastery, and is shared with other workers and the organization through team learning. Knowledge management was proposed as a strategy for restoring power, over production, to the organization.

Wong and Aspinwall (2001) noted that a knowledge management implementation framework should have five characteristics: “(1) a clear structure on how to conduct and implement knowledge management, (2) clear distinction among the types of knowledge to be managed, (3) highlight the necessary knowledge management processes or activities needed to manipulate knowledge, (4) include the factors that will affect performance, and (5) provide a balanced view between the role of technology and human beings in knowledge management” (p. 100). The knowledge management implementation framework serves as a strategy for reducing the autonomy of the knowledge worker, while increasing the control of the organization over productivity. Unlike the learning organization, knowledge management does not seek to create holistic change in the company, but isolates knowledge work as an aspect of production, and identifies the elements that are necessary for management to manipulate so as to increase productivity as was done in the time of Taylor (Drucker, 1999, p. 80). ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 8

The Future of Epistemology in Organizational Leadership Epistemology has an important role to play in the development of human services organizations. The concept of good governance that guides the effective management of such organizations articulates some of the productivity issues addressed by Drucker (1999). In the case of my organization, productivity is hindered by the fact that knowledge about specific critical aspects of work is possessed by the accountant who does not welcome succession planning, responds negatively to queries from the board of directors, works in isolation, and makes decisions for others and their departments unilaterally.

This situation has contributed to inefficiency and ineffectiveness in a number of core areas of work, and as argued by Ambrosini and Bowman (2001) contributes to inferior work practices (p. 812). Good governance argues that successful management is characterized by accountability, transparency, participatory leadership, and responsiveness. This is reiterated by Drucker (1999) when he noted that productivity was curtailed by knowledge workers autonomy in deciding the task, and having unilateral control over the production process—The work done by the accountant is knowledge work and the fact that it is held only by him contributes to a situation where the organization is held at ransom.

If there are opportunities for the improvement of the accounting function, this is hindered because of the lack of access by the organization to it, and the general lack of responsiveness to good governance practices. In the case of my accountant, deciding what to purchase without consultation, and refusing to answer questions posed by the board directors contributes to productivity problems. Drucker (1999) noted that overcoming this situation “requires changes in attitude not only on the part of the individual knowledge worker, but on the part of the whole organization” (p. 92). ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 9 The problems with the accountant articulated above can be solved by one of two or a combination of the following approaches. These recommendations were derived from weeks five and six discussion questions.

These discussions enabled me to have a better understanding of the needs and challenges of my organization, and provided me with the opportunity to evaluate the company and make recommendations for its improvement. The following two recommendations represent the possible actions that I may undertake to increase organizational productivity: (1) reform the company to that of a learning organization, which takes a systems approach to productivity, thus the failure of accounts is not seen as an isolated element, but is the responsibility of all employees and departments, therefore all employees see it as critical to learn the tacit knowledge possessed by the accountant so that they are better poised to recommend changes.

When all employees have a shared vision, greater pressure will be placed on the accountant to be accountable, transparent, and participatory in his leadership; and or (2) develop a knowledge management system to capture all of the job roles that are assigned to the accountant and the various steps that he undertakes to fulfill them—There will be need to integrate feedback components with the clinic nurse, statistical clerk, and clinic receptionist, before commodities can be purchased; and in order to successfully meet his reporting obligations he must answer specific questions about the financial status of the organization, which will automatically be shared with the board directors. Such a system could eliminate the lack of transparency, participation, and accountability that has curtailed efficiency and effectiveness. The implementation of a knowledge management system would also help the organization to be better operated as a learning organization, as the steps for each task that is performed by the accountant would be accessible to leadership, which could be used to teach others by way of team learning strategies. ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 10

The future of management of human service organizations in the knowledge worker age is not totally distinct from traditional epistemology—it integrates critical concepts of the past to help solve new and emergent challenges. Empiricism, rationalism, pragmatism, and relativism are four of the longstanding epistemological concepts that guide management practitioners about the origin of tacit knowledge—On one hand know-how originates from the theoretical foundations of empiricism and rationalism as seen in the in the knowledge that individuals obtain through formal education that prepares them to fit into the workplace; and on the other hand it originates from the encountered experiences in the workplace.

Both views are correct and hence when theorizing about the origin of knowledge in knowledge work, management theorists must be mindful that there are multiple valid perspectives. ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY References Ambrosini, V. & Bowman, C. (2001). Tacit knowledge: Some suggestions for 11 operationalization. Journal of Management Studies, 38(6), pp. 811-829. Retrieved from http://web. ebscohost. com. ezproxy. apollolibrary. com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer? sid=e9e 776b0-e4f1-46a2-af57-b1403102e01b%40sessionmgr112&vid=2&hid=107 Bayer, B. (2007). How not to refute Quine: Evaluating Kim’s Alternatives to Naturalized Epistemology. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 45(4), 473-495. Retrieved from http://search. proquest. com. ezproxy. apollolibrary. com/docview/218154099? accountid=35 812 Bonjour, L. (1978).

Can empirical knowledge have a foundation? American Philosophical Quarterly, 15(1), 1-13. Retrieved from http://www. williams. edu/philosophy/fourth_layer/faculty_pages/jcruz/courses/Bonjour(1978). pdf Cooper, D. (1999). Epistemology: the classic readings. United Kingdom: Blackwell. Drucker, P. F. (1999). Knowledge-worker productivity: The biggest challenge. California Management Review, 41(2), 79-94. Retrieved from http://web. ebscohost. com. ezproxy. apollolibrary. com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer? sid=d0b 953c0-25c0-4ce2-acc3-a2eb62ec1545%40sessionmgr114=2=106 Feldman, R. (2003). Epistemology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Manyika, J. (1996).

The coming imperative of the world’s knowledge economy. The Financial Times, 17. Retrieved from http://go. galegroup. com. ezproxy. apollolibrary. com/ps/i. do? =GALE%7CA145813050=2. 1 =uphoenix=r=GPS=w Moser, P. & vander Nat, A. (Eds. ), Human knowledge: classical and contemporary approaches. New York: Oxford. ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY 12 Schnapper, D. (2009). Relativism. Society, 46(2), 175-179. doi:10. 1007/s12115-008-9181-6 Senge, P. M. (2010). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Business Book Summaries, 1(1), pp. 1-8. Retrieved from http://ehis. ebscohost. com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer? sid=05ba5549-4ada-47b6-aca7

1. What is ethics? What is morality? Ethics is the philosophical study of morality. Morality refers to the belief of right and wrong, good and bad, beliefs that can include judgments, values, rules, principles and theories. 2. In what ways are we forced to do ethics? What is at stake in these deliberations? A person is forced to do ethics every time they exam any feeling, choice, or action concerning right or wrong. The thing that is at stake when doing ethics is a person’s values. 3. What is the unfortunate result of accepting moral beliefs without questioning them?

Some of the unfortunate results of accepting moral beliefs without questioning them are it undermines your personal freedom meaning if you just accept belief from someone else without thinking about them they are not truly your beliefs. Another result of blindly accepting belief of someone else is when asked to defend these beliefs the person may have no sound argument to back it up. Finally it limits intellectual moral growth. 4. Can our feelings be our sole guide to morality? Why or why not?

Feelings should not be sole guide to morality because by solely following feelings a person is not critically examining the problem. 5. What is descriptive ethics? In this field, what do researchers study? Descriptive ethics is the moral study of belief and practices. Researchers in this field try to explain how people actually behave and think. 6. What is normative ethics? Applied ethics? Normative ethics is the study of principles, rules, or theories that guide our actions and judgments. Applied ethics is application of moral norms applied to a specific moral issue. . What is metaethics? What is the difference between normative ethics and metaethics? Metaethics is the study of the meaning and logical structure of moral beliefs. Normative ethics job is to assume certain things about the meaning of moral terms and the logic relation among them but the job of meteethics is to question all assumptions. 8. What is the difference between judgments of value and judgments of obligation? Judgments of value judges what is morality good, bad, blameworthy, and praiseworthy.

While judgments of obligation deal with actions and things a person feels what they should do. 9. What is the difference between moral and nonmoral value? Moral Value refer to value in the sense of morality while nonmortal value refers sense of good and bad that are not morality bad or good but rather quality. 10. What is the difference between instrumental value and intrinsic value? Instrumental values are things that are valuable as a means to something else. While intrinsic values are things that are valuable for its own sake. 11.

To what does the “preeminence of reason” refer? The preeminence of reason refers to being able to critically think and logically argue a claim. 12. What is the principle of universalizability? The principle of universalizability states that if a moral statement applies to one situation it must apply to relatively similar moral situations 13. What is the relationship between morality and religion? The relationship between morality and religion is very important because same way critical reason is used to exam moral norms it can be used to exam religion.