True knowledge in philosophy

The truth of any knowledge and object can be proved or questioned. Kant's antinomy, which says that even two opposing hypotheses can be substantiated logically, puts true knowledge in the rank of a mythical animal. Such an animal, perhaps, does not exist at all, and Karamazovskaya "nothing is true, everything is permitted" should become the highest postulate of human life. But first things first.

Philosophical relativism, and even later - solipsism, pointed out to the world that true knowledge is not always so. The problem of what can be considered genuine in philosophy and what is false has been raised for a very long time. The most famous ancient example of the struggle for the truth of judgments is the dispute between Socrates and the sophists and the well-known dictum of the philosopher: "I know that I do not know anything." Sophists, by the way, were among the first to question almost everything.

The times of theology somewhat suppressed the ardor of philosophers, giving the "only true" and righteous view of life and the creation of the world by God. But Giordano Bruno and Nikolai Kuzansky, thanks to their scientific discoveries, empirically proved that the Sun does not spin around the Earth, and the planet itself is not the center of the universe. The discovery of philosophers and scientists of the 15th century caused controversy about what true knowledge means, since the planet, as it turned out, rushes in an unknown and frightening outer space. At that time new philosophical schools begin to appear and science develop.

So, the true is knowledge, according to Aristotle, which is fully consistent with reality. This approach is easy enough to criticize, because it does not take into account both intentional delusions and insanity. R. Descartes believed that the true knowledge differs from the false one in that it has clarity. Another philosopher D. Berkeley believed that truth is what the majority agree with. But, however that may be, the most important criterion of truth is its objectivity, that is, independence from man and his consciousness.

It can not be said that humanity, complicating technology, has come so far in rejecting any delusion that true knowledge is already at arm's length. Modern technologies, computers and the Internet were in the hands of uneducated and unprepared societies, which led to information intoxication and gluttony. Nowadays, information is oozing from all the cracks, and only the real Moses from programming and social sciences can curb this flow. This picture was described quite vividly already 50 years ago, namely in the book "1984" written by J. Orwell, and in the novel "Oh, Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley.

True knowledge can be worldly, scientific or artistic, as well as moral. In general, there are as many truths as there are in the world of professions. For example, the problem of hunger in Africa for a scientist is a problem requiring a systematic approach, and for a believer it is a punishment for sins. That is why there are so many continuing disputes around many phenomena, and, unfortunately, high-speed technologies, science and globalization have not yet been able to lead mankind even to the solution of the simplest moral issues.