Truth?

We commenced the lecture with the explanation of how the word truth is a complex and problematic term with different connotations, to add further detail to this Mr Tomalin shared with us one of his experiences. While in a wine testing trip in Mendoza, Argentina, he was asked to share his opinions regarding the smell of a particular wine which he could smell as many times as he wanted. However, he was reluctant to say what he could smell since “it could be wrong”, it could not be what the guides could actually smell. Evidently, when they compared what each one of them could smell, all opinions were different but they explained him that there was no wrong or right answer. This lead us to the conclusion that truths based on sensory perceptions depend on the individual person, hence, there is no false or true statement. 

Furthermore, we discussed the two types of propositions.  Analytic proposition is that whose predicate concept is contained in its subject. An example for this is, 

"All bachelors are unmarried", this proposition is right since being unmarried is part of the definition of bachelor. The other type of proposition is synthetic, this is a proposition whose predicate concept is not contained in its subject concept. "All bachelors are unhappy" is an example of this, since being unhappy is not part of the definition of  bachelor, hence, this proposition is wrong since there can be lots of bachelors that are not unhappy. In addition, when we were given time to consider another example of analytic proposition, I struggled to make a right proposition since I was assuming concepts that were not in the word’s definition. This proves how one must be extra careful when making analytical propositions.

Moral relativism was another topic that we discussed which states that absolute truths and values are socially constructed, this means that they depend on the cultural background of each person. However, for me this was controversial since I asked myself  if imposing values on others is justifiable to get an universal truth, or if that meant that other values were not right. On the other hand, cognitive relativism states that there are no universal truths whatsoever, consequently there are no methods for getting the truth that are better than others. This relativism ask questions such as, why is science superior to others methods of gaining knowledge like witchcraft? And states that judgments are true depending on your perspective and it is up to you to choose which method is better but you have to be aware it was YOUR choice. 

These two relativisms made me analyze up to what point we decide what we believe. Everyday we are bombarded with information at school that was chosen for us to learn, that is said is going to help us to study a career, to get a job, “to live”. But to what extend do we have an option to choose? Or to even go against this? Nowadays’ society compels us to study, to work in order to gain money; we are forced to believe this is the right way to live. But is it?

Classification! Do you stereotype?

Ms Briggs introduced this lecture topic which was classification. First of all, she explained that this topic not only comes up in biology but in other subjects too. Then she proceed and defined this term:  "arrange in classes with shared characteristics". Afterwards, several  pictures were displayed and we were asked to classify them: first, in one main category in which all the items would fit with their characteristics, secondly, in three or four categories with a minimum of two items in each and finally one single category for each item. For our group it was easy to create the main category: objects that are tangible. Then for the three or four categories, we had similar categories than another group. Furthermore, we were asked to reflect why we classify. Peers opinions were heard saying that it help us remember, or that it help us organise objects by their appearance. 

The history of classification was also explained. Carl Linneus designed it but his classification only depended on the appearance of objects. Therefore, nowadays, there has been a reclassification according to the organisms' DNA in order to be more precise. In addition, I wonder when was the first time that classification was useful for humans? This must have been a really long long time ago, was it when humans started looking for food? Anyways we will never know the answer for this.

We discussed how classification is interpretative: our brain makes the association to group our experiences; and how classification can be influenced by the culture of the person, by how the person perceives the object, and by the need or relevance in the society the person lives in. However, there is a risk with classification. It can become racism, or even sexism. For example, through history there has been various situations where black and white people were classified as completely opposite people, hence, could not do the same things. Therefore, we have to be careful when we classify because it can be an essential way of knowing as long as we are using it adequately.

In addition, we were shown a web page in which we could test ourselves to know if we stereotype people more than we think and we were told that we could be really impresses with the results. Consequently,  I'm eager to try this test, to partially understand how I make decisions based in classification, to know a little better how my brain works.