Penny 1

Michael Penny

Mr. Buescher

Philosophy-P, Period 1

27 November, 2017

Constructivism: A Combination is Best

Epistemology can be defined as a branch of Philosophy concerned with the origin, nature,

methods, and limits of human knowledge. The main problem, or question, of this study is

whether or not humans can have knowledge. Many different Philosophers have attempted to

create ways of thinking as an answer to this problem, but in a way, it’s only made it more

confusing of a question. As a result, there are a few potential answers to this problem, and they

are all a certain way of defining whether or not humans can have knowledge - and a lot of

different standards, justifications, and definitions. Skepticism: Easily my least favorite of all of

the thought processes. The reason I feel that it is the weakest of the processes of determining if

humans have knowledge is because the only way they can determine anything is through

questioning. This means that they will not be able to come up with any theories themselves, and

they can only disprove others. Another way to think about if humans can have knowledge is

Empiricism, the thought that humans can only have knowledge through pure experience. This

theory is rather weak, also, because no human can experience everything and have knowledge of

things that they haven’t experienced. The final theory, Constructivism, is the best way to think

about and determine if humans have knowledge or not. Constructivism is best defined as a

combination of Rationalism and Empiricism, where logic and experience work together, and

neither is complete without the other. Three reasons it’s the best are: it doesn’t limit itself to one
 Penny 2

specific way of thinking, it outshines all the other ways of determining if humans have

knowledge, and it marries two of the best ways of determining if humans have knowledge.

The first way that Constructivism is the best is that it doesn’t limit itself to one specific

way of thinking. The way that the book describes it is this: “Is it possible that each philosophy

[Empiricism and Rationalism] is partially correct and partially wrong? Is it possible that some

sort of combined position will be more adequate?” (Epistemology, 51). This means that it has the

ability to take the best out of both philosophies and leave the worst out of them. There’s a

Martial Art that does this same process - Krav Maga, and it is known as the deadliest Martial Art

in the world. The reason it is important to make sure that one does not limit oneself to a certain

way of thinking is because certain events can disprove this way of thinking if a person is too

embedded in it - for example: “Look at its (an object’s) top, bottom, edge, front, and back. What

you literally see is a series of different visual impressions, each with a different shape and

perhaps other aspects that change as the object is rotated.” (Epistemology 51). This is a good

reason that someone has to be able to see multiple different perspectives, and why a combination

of several different philosophies is best - because it allows the belief to adapt and take the best

out of everything, and is harder to disprove. Expanding on the last concrete detail: “These

categories [different views and perspectives] cannot be derived from experience, because it is in

terms of these categories that your successive experiences are made to be coherent and

meaningful. Where, then, do these categories come from?” (Epistemology, 51). These categories

come from logic and reasoning. Through logic, we understand that we are looking at the same

object, even though it is from a different perspective and looks different. One might say that it’s

more logical to subscribe to a single train of thought, and it keeps one’s thoughts organized.

However, this is a bad criticism, because of the fact that this way of thinking might be a
 Penny 3

combination of two, but it still is one way of thinking - it is technically one philosophy, and one

way to determine if humans have knowledge. This is why it’s important to view several different

philosophies and keep your mind open to different ways of thinking - it’s also important to be

more appealing than all of the other philosophies, and outshine them.

Another reason why Constructivism is the best is because it outshines all the other

philosophies - in popularity, quality, influence, and power. One of the ways that this is the most

influential philosophy is because of the creator: Immanuel Kant: “...ended by radically revising

how we think about knowledge. As a result, we now categorize all philosophy as either pre-

Kantian or post-Kantian.” (Epistemology, 52). The creator was so influential and important that

one of the ways to classify a philosophy is by his name - that’s similar to the way that even the

years are counted now. A reason that this philosophy should be the main way to prove humans

have knowledge is this: “In this sense, the mind does not conform to an external world, but the

contents found in experience do conform to the structure of the mind. The mind constructs its

objects out of the raw materials provided by the senses.” (Epistemology, 56). The philosophy is

proven to be true in this sentence - the experiences everyone has are completely subjective, yet

only because of their minds reacting to the things they experience daily. The final way that this

thought process outshines the others is because it is able to see the faults in other philosophies

and avoid them: “On the other hand, Kant wanted to start where Hume started (in experience),

without ending up where Hume ended up (in skepticism).” (Epistemology, 55). He can see that

Skepticism is only good in the case of disproving something that someone might think is

knowledge, but not for proving something is knowledge. The main argument against this point

might be that Constructivism is not more influential than the others, but I disagree - the creator of

it stood out so much that even now, in the modern day, people realize that he was so influential
 Penny 4

they define all philosophies on Epistemology by his name and how long he lived. Being

influential and outshining the competition may be important, but it should do this because it

combines two of the main philosophies into one, nice, all-encompassing theory.

The final reason that the best philosophy for Epistemology is Constructivism is because it

combines two of the better ways of thinking: Empiricism and Rationalism. The way that it

marries the two is somewhat explained here: “The rationalists argue that experience alone cannot

give us knowledge, for our knowledge requires the rational principles found in the mind. The

empiricists argue that reason cannot give us knowledge, for we require the contributions of

experience.” (Epistemology, 51). This means that they might just go hand in hand - they depend

on each other, but can stand on their own. They are better together, and that’s why

Constructivism is the best philosophy. The person who made it, Immanuel Kant, said it can be

called “‘rational-empiricism’ or ‘empirical-rationalism.’ He himself called it ‘critical philosophy’

because he wanted to critique reason, which means that he wanted to sort out the legitimate

claims of reason from groundless ones.” (Epistemology, 52). At this, it may even be better than

Skepticism - sorting out the bad ideas, that is. It can disprove bad theories through the

empiricism/rationalism combo - it depends on whether or not it can be logically proven based on

experience, if it’s knowledge. A sentence that shows how Empiricism is flawed, but enhanced by

Rationalism is this one: “ Most properties of objects (such as their color or density), we learn

from experience and we can imagine them being different than they are. On the other hand, space

and time seem to be necessary preconditions for any experience at all. Spatiality and temporality

do not seem to be optional qualities of the objects that appear within experience. Why?”

(Epistemology, 52). This shows how humans are bound by their earthly (subjective) minds, and

are unable to comprehend completely objective things. However, someone might be able to
 Penny 5

logically come to the conclusion that an apple could potentially be blue, for example. No one has

ever experienced this, but it is entirely imaginable that it one day happen. Someone might say

that Skepticism is better at disproving the false knowledge, but Constructivism is a better belief

system overall, because it does not only disprove false beliefs, it can build its own beliefs and

stand on its own.

Three of the many reasons Constructivism is the best philosophy are these: it doesn’t

limit itself to simply logic or questioning, or only one way of thinking; it outshines all the others;

and it combines two of the best ways to determine whether or not people have knowledge. As for

the limiting itself to only one thought process, the paragraph went over how some things can

seem like it’s one way to a certain person’s subjective experience, but another to a different

person’s experience. It would be stuck at an argument of subjectivity if there were no

combination of Rationalism here - and this is why it’s best to not limit oneself to a single thought

process. The second body paragraph talked about how Constructivism outshines the competition,

in the way that the creator was so influential that the new way to classify philosophy is post-

Kantian or pre-Kantian, and this means that the philosophy must have also been pretty

influential, if the creator was. The third and final body paragraph was about how it combines

some of the better parts of the two philosophies that are better for proving humans have

knowledge, and leaves the worse parts out. This means that it’s true how it combines two of the

thought processes and leaves the unnecessary parts out. Therefore, if all three parts of the main

argument of this essay are true, the main argument must be true - Constructivism, a combination

of objective logic and human experience - an inherently subjective topic, is the best Philosophy

when it comes down to Epistemology.

Penny 6