Epistemology, Knower and Known

Is there a separate or an artificial boundary?

In inquiring about our relationship in the universe and the objects around us, it raises a question of relationship. The West and the East conceive this relationship differently. The split between the subject and the object is typically Western. The Non-Western view sees this distinction as artificial. In this paper, I will expand on these two views and attempt to come to a conclusion to this question.

Epistemology in the Western world assumes a distinction between the knower and the known. According to Rene Descartes’ Cogito, he was sure that he existed as a thinking thing. Descartes said he could only be sure of the contents of his own mind. Once this theory was established, he went on to prove the existence of a non-deceiving God. As a result he had the reliability of his perceptions in regards to “known” objects in the material universe. Western rationalists have agreed with Descartes that by thinking we can know. On the other hand, empiricists have argued that it is the sense experience rather than re

. . .

View the whole essay, without interruption

If I am not separate from an object, there is no “me” to serve as the knower. It was the metaphysical speculation that led them along different paths to very different conclusions. In this theory on e can only understand the world as a participant being immersed in it, not as one who stands back to observe and study it objectively. To become knowledgeable, one must have many experiences and be able to reflect upon them to understand their meaning.

The Non-Western Tradition

According to the Buddhists, our attachments to the illusions of the world in which we are within is not what it is.

African epistemology denies the Western distinction between subject and object, as well. However, the Non-Western philosophy that says experience gains knowledge seems more of a reality. From our ego-bound perspective the sensible relationship is that the subject and object seem to define each other.

The pre-Socratic cosmologists assumed the distinction between the knower and known originally. Even though they had their differences, Plato and Aristotle shared an assumption that the world of Form and matter was separate from the human self. This denial is a deeper unity that insists “man and nature are not two separate independent opposing realities but one inseparable continuum of a hierarchical order”. The Western view sees the distinction as two separate entities. Both rationalists and empiricists acknowledge the distinction between the knower and the known.

Approximate Word count = 756
Approximate Pages = 3 (250 words per page double spaced)

Simply subscribe to view this paper, and 100,000 others.