認識의 眞理性과 그 限界에 關한 小考 = A Study on Truism and the Limitation of Knowledge

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

We get the following connexion of knowing and the known is that of logical necessity. Just as there are different theories of truth in epistemology, just so there are also different ways getting to know the truth.
Indeed, each conception of truth has its own peculiar theory of how truth is acquired or known as it follows:
By copy-theory(correspondence-theory), its adherents think that truth results from the direct apprehension of naked reality.
To some of them this apprehension is a very simple affair. In fact, it is so simple that they are almost disinclined to propose a theory how it occurs. They naively trust their experience and agreement with objective external reality.
By the pragmatic theory 〈pragmatism〉, it falls short of knowledge, however, hot because they enshroud themselves in a veil impenetrable to the human mind, but because by themselves they do not call for judgment, criticism, or interpretation. Jeopardize such experience by interrupting their smooth-flowing continuity, and then one will have to decide what conditions will restore it. If invoking, these conditions actually does restore it, them that much we know. But the knowledge we have recognized is not immediate, but mediate. It is mediated through intelligence which adjudged its instrumental usefulness.
By constructionism 〈criticism〉, we find a very similar and yet quite dissimilar conception of how knowledge is acquired or know. Here too knowledge takes its point of departure from the senses.
Sense-theory, however, are not the first step toward an unobstructed view of objective external reality. Advocates of the consistence-theory, as above mentioned, doubt that any one can ever come into naked contact with reality as it actually is. Like Immanuel Kant, they have no hope of getting to know any object in itself, das Ding an sich.
Indeed, mind tends to make knowledge in terms of its own categories of time, space, causation, Shema-Zeit and the like, Consequntly this so-called 「Copy」theory of acquiring knowledge is a taking in from without. In operating on its sense data the mind checks for internal consistency. The more consistent they are, the more nearly approximate the universal law and order which is characteristic of the rationality of the world, wherein all knowledge subsist as interrelated whole. knowledge is consisted of interacting with intuitive Form and categorical Judgment.
By the evidence-theory 〈pehnomemology〉, it is one which claims to penetrate to the very core of reality and yet one which at the same is the highly private internal product of the knower. This is recognizing one's world through an intuitive experience. Here knowledge seems to com in sudden flashers or sharp insights. Often it is as difficult to state precisely what these intuitions are as to state systematically and objectively how they com about, they are inscrutable character or in communicable knowledge. Perhaps self-validating knowledge of this sort is merely an expression of the uniqueness of a person's individuality.
Finally truth should be believed in 「it is true」 by judging of logical, or thinkabel necessity.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 序言
• Ⅱ. 認識의 學說 및 成立
• 1. 模寫說
• 2. 實驗說
• 3. 構成說
• 4. 明證說
• Ⅲ. 認識의 妥當 및 限界
• 1. 絶對論
• 2. 懷疑論
• 3. 相對論
• Ⅳ. 眞理의 標識 및 標準
• Ⅴ. 結論