Debate Essay
Beliefs and Reality
Merissa Manful
California State University, San Marcos
Making sense of the complexity in our behaviors, natural phenomina and our own beliefs is not an easy task. Psychology gives us a way to empirically test the complicated, interrelated and controverse topics we face in life in order to seek some correlation or truth about the world individuals experience. Psychology today was not the same as it was in the time of the early Greeks. Since the dawn of time philosophers and scholars have tirelessly aimed to decode the truths about the world around them. Ultimately, Philosophers were puzzled with the notion of relying on our senses for answers. They were captivated by a notion of deriving correct answers from what we see, feel, and experience in science. Each individual has a personal point of view on life, suggesting sensory experiences are extremely biased. Some critical thinkers oppose the idea of finding a ultimate “truth” while others welcome the notion with many “truths”, in this essay we will closely examine both sides of this argument.
In the early Greek era, a more traditional view of science was used. It begins with empirical observation, theory and and many tests after that to either refute it or support it. It assumes we may reach an ultimate truth, that leading studies may point to a definite answer. This traditional view is leaning towards determinism. Moving through the era, philosophers alike challenge this theory in an attempt to illustrate truth more realistically.
Philosophers like Karl Popper began to question the notion of a real “truth” in examining the biased outlook our senses gave us but still relied on them in science. He began to question every scientific discovery with a start of a single problem. These problems are individually driven. He believed all science began with empirical observation moving towords a theory and
Merissa Manful
California State University, San Marcos
Making sense of the complexity in our behaviors, natural phenomina and our own beliefs is not an easy task. Psychology gives us a way to empirically test the complicated, interrelated and controverse topics we face in life in order to seek some correlation or truth about the world individuals experience. Psychology today was not the same as it was in the time of the early Greeks. Since the dawn of time philosophers and scholars have tirelessly aimed to decode the truths about the world around them. Ultimately, Philosophers were puzzled with the notion of relying on our senses for answers. They were captivated by a notion of deriving correct answers from what we see, feel, and experience in science. Each individual has a personal point of view on life, suggesting sensory experiences are extremely biased. Some critical thinkers oppose the idea of finding a ultimate “truth” while others welcome the notion with many “truths”, in this essay we will closely examine both sides of this argument.
In the early Greek era, a more traditional view of science was used. It begins with empirical observation, theory and and many tests after that to either refute it or support it. It assumes we may reach an ultimate truth, that leading studies may point to a definite answer. This traditional view is leaning towards determinism. Moving through the era, philosophers alike challenge this theory in an attempt to illustrate truth more realistically.
Philosophers like Karl Popper began to question the notion of a real “truth” in examining the biased outlook our senses gave us but still relied on them in science. He began to question every scientific discovery with a start of a single problem. These problems are individually driven. He believed all science began with empirical observation moving towords a theory and