Pascal’s Theory of Knowledge

Blaise Pascal was a French Physicist, Mathematician, and Theologian. He was born on June 19, 1623, in Clermont-Ferrand. He founded the modern theory of probability. He invented the first calculator and published a groundbreaking series of letters Les Provincial. He wrote notes and letters that would be posthumously organized and published as the Pensees.


During the seventeenth century, the scientific and theological controversies shaped the intellectual outlook of natural and social scientists. He did not publish a separate essay or letter on the theory of knowledge, but his other articles and notes provide an overall view on this subject. Though he left contradictory insights about natural knowledge and which recognize the unique role of religious belief. Pascal also acknowledged geometric understanding and logical outcomes. On the other hand, his skepticism, pragmatic, and empiricism are trapped in a kind of philosophical limbo. He further said that our knowledge of the natural world could never be sure, but it is more likely. He brought attention to both scientific and religious absolute certainty.


Pascal's perception was ahead of its time, and his awareness was unmatchable, but its limitations. His ideas were quite different from Bacon's; he created space for hypothesis and suggested confirming the hypothesis through tests and experiments. However, he did not tail his investigations precisely as described. It is very much necessary to do such testing. Many thinkers called him more original and realistic, like Pascal's skepticism.


He says that hypotheses make final results, but it makes questions to determine the actual cause, which helps us further speculate phenomena. The experiment may be unable to prove a given hypothesis, and then it may disapprove it. He forecasted the theory of empirical falsification of Karl Popper, who came after three centuries. His point of view is quite different from the scientific claims of others that results are based on probability, not on the conclusive experiment.


Pascal narrates hypotheses from pure mathematics and exploration vice versa. Pascal identified that there are three types of premises:

  1. The negation of assumptions, which suggests making incredible results and must therefore be true.
  2. An affirmation that involves irrationality; must be false.
  3. If both repeal and declaration cannot give absurd results, one cannot make any valid conclusion about its truth.


His contemporaries called him an experimenter, a foundationalist, a positivist, and a skeptic. His view about epistemology are complex and seen open questions along with great contradictions. Furthermore, he says that "authority" is the main idea of ancient history and religion. The authority comes from history, jurisprudence, scripture, language, and omnipotent leader. The theological matters enthrone authority to make the truth in one direction. But in physical and natural sciences, he opposed and discouraged the idea of authority.


In the famous rhetorical and skeptical variation Que Puis-Je Savoir ("What Can I Know"), he inquires what margins and what level of assurance we want to say we know what we believe we know. Pascal recognizes three different types of sources of knowledge, and he explains them in order form. First and foremost is body and sense, the second is reason and mind, and the third is will and heart. The structure of order is natural, and it is formed under its jurisdiction. Each order has its domain and application and its own merits and methods to study the charge. He coined the term le Coeur to the inner being.


Pascal primarily believes that math, geometry, and logic constitute a specific kind of knowledge. In which reason is pivotal, and we can deduce results from them. It signifies the particular ability which we know within a specific way. Pascal endorses Descartes's criteria of clearness and clarity as reliable evidence of truth. He stated that everything could be doubt and error in response to Cartesian rationalism and the deductive method. He said it as "useless and uncertain."


He was half an experimentalist and empiricist. He argued that reason is the center of knowledge about the natural world. Via observation and senses, we can quickly test and verify our understanding. The reason has a vital role in processing that knowledge. We can form the hypothesis and predictions. These predictions and theories can be judged in the realm of reason, which tells us whether the results are proved or disproved. In his Treatise on the Vacuum, he solely put reason and sense on the top and explained the role of the reason. He completely negated the authority to the establishment of scientific truth. Nevertheless, he was optimistic about interpreting scientific progress.


The third element of the source of knowledge is quite a mystery in itself. In Pensees, he frequently uses and refers a Logique du Coeur. But he left vague to explain this phrase. He explained the heart in the fragments and said that it has its reason, which is not known. Our heart is naturally inclined to understand itself. Our heart feels instantly and transcending sense and before it. It is more or like Kantian intuition or as if it were a form of natural or divinely inherited intelligence. It cannot contradict a reason, but it exceeds and adds to it.


To sum up, his theory of knowledge is itself contradictory and vague. He believed that human observation is the only rational approach to understand and explore the world. He rejected Cartesian rationalism and criticized Descartes for reducing philosophy to a single model. On the other hand, he declared "Authority" is the prime element in ancient history and religion. Overall, his minute details of the theory of knowledge initiate a rethinking of discourse.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Work life Balance and Family Time

Market Value and Prices

How to determine the health of B2B the overall transaction