Science Based on Observation Essay

Aristotle and Plato are ancient Greek philosophers who studied important matters such as ethics, science among many others. Their contributions have arguably emerged to be more influential especially in issues related to the science of observation and reasoning. Although their works are theoretically less valuable in current times, they continue to have the most significant historical values. The paper illustrates some matters that happen to science regarding observation by considering the sensory knowledge opinion for both Plato and Aristotle.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Observation being a perceptual process implies that to observe is to look at something by attending to some information emerging from the perceptual experience. The science of perception is a complicated process just like the sensation process. For instance, there are some factors that determine what individuals can perceive (Brennan & Brennan, 1997).

Observation is further supported by a rational explanation which results in actual knowledge. Therefore, the science of perception is assumed to always originate from the faculty of reason. Most importantly, observation has the potential to discover the beliefs and thoughts of the senses independently. The already obtained ideas and opinions are known to be self-validating. As a result, they have the status of knowledge just because their rational faculty is a more accurate way by which individuals can acquire the knowledge.

Based on the fact that individuals can form valid opinions on the observation without a rational explanation, it means their minds are genuinely exercised but with a little knowledge (Brennan & Brennan, 1997). On the other hand, if people can state true opinions by considering a rational explanation, their minds constitute enough knowledge because their perception of senses is eliminating in the case.

From experience, individuals have to deal only with some single objects. The world of observation being the world of experience is made wholly of a single object. Perception is what comes first in the knowledge of an individual. Intellectual Observation is concerned only with the general expertise whereby the knowledge originates from the experiences.

Sensuous perception is taken as an important function since it involves the aspect of sense which is apprehension with the sense. From the given perspective, the degree of precision is dependent on whatever is being tested, and the extent of the observation sentence needed in the process of evaluating the object (Brennan & Brennan, 1997). However, the agreement of what the observer takes on an object is more reliable and easier to understand even more. Observation may require the application of a pragmatic consideration when finessing questions concerning the reports of individual perception. Perceptions can only be genuine if the investigators can make a reasonable agreement on whether it gives good evidence needed to test a particular theory more straightforwardly.

For the observation to appear valid, it must either be contingently false or true such that competent individuals having different language can suitably decide whether to reject or accept it. However, the observation will base on what happens whenever individuals look or listen to a given scenario in a more standard manner under the appropriate conditions of perceptions.

Observation is an exclusive perceptual process. Some of the things scientist research on does not have any close interaction with the human perceptual system as needed to provide perceptual experiences of them. Records concerning observation are sometimes not epistemically some data obtained from experimental equipment. It is not necessary for the investigator to use the non-perceptual approach to confirm and validate perceptual data and give corrections to their errors (Brennan & Brennan, 1997).

The evidential value on observation depends on the sensitivity of where it is used to study. However, the above in turn requires adequate theoretical claims that its sensitivity may depend on in a given dimension. More so, the attainment of proper observation is successful after training when various individuals on how to report their perceptions in conformity with unstable operations. However, individuals at times may object to what they perceive should not be confused with things they are trained to say whenever they see them.

Commonsensible involves some factors such as movement, rest, and magnitude. However, they are common to all individuals but not peculiar to any sense of the individual. Some of the apparent changes can be perceived either by sight or touch. The science of observation involves the aspect of a related object of individual senses. For example, the white object that one can perceive is just the son of Diaries. Therefore, the "son of Diaries" is incidental to the straightly visible white patch that one talks about Diaries as being seen by people. Since the above is only incidentally an object of the sense, it means that there are no way such factors influences the sights.

There are two main former types of objects which are perceptible by the sense .The first type is the particular objects which cover a series of many thoughts. It constitutes objects of feelings in a more strict sense of the given term (Brennan & Brennan, 1997). From them, one can adapt the structure of each type of the touch depending on the nature of things.

In a scenario of trying to know what is to have sense, the first transition concerns the action of the father, and it takes place before one is born. In such case, at birth, some of the living things appear to be in respect with sensation, which in turn, is the stage that corresponds to the acquisition of knowledge. In other words, the actual observation and consciousness correspond to the important step of the exercises of expertise. However, there is a significant difference between the two cases when compared more extensively. For instance, objects that generally excite the individual's sensory power to a particular event such as the heard and the perceptible lies outside (Brennan & Brennan, 1997).

The primary cause of difference between the two aspects is that whatever the actual sensation captures is individual while the knowledge apprehends the universals. However, the two are generally in the sense with the soul of a person. As a result, individuals can comfortably exercise their knowledge when they are in need of, but their sensation is independent on themselves since there must be the presence of a sensible object. Furthermore, an observable thing might be potential in either of the two senses. As noted earlier, anything that possesses the power of sensation is inherent like the perceivable object.

Observation depends on the entire process of movement. It is held at the sort of some changes in the quality. Individuals can never perceive senses themselves. The same case they cannot see the external figures of the sights. Unless there is a stimulation of the foreign statistics, then there is no way then produce any single sensation. The power of what an individual can observe usually is parallel with the combustible.

The process of perception implies that whatever that has the potential to see or hear has the power to see and hear even if one is at the moment of sleep. Therefore, sensation entails two meanings which include the sense actual and the sense potential. Observation is considered to be appetitive. From the research, appetite results in better desires and passion about something (Brennan & Brennan, 1997). It is true that all animals have at least a single sense commonly known as touch. Anything that has a touch feeling must have pleasures and pain. It means they have pleasant and painful figures within them and wherever such factors are involved there must be a desire where desire appears to be appetition of something that is pleasant.

From various definitions, the power of perception is no longer found unless from the self-nutrition power in all animals (Brennan & Brennan, 1997). However, when it comes to plants, Perception power is seen to be isolated from the former. Also, no any sense can be found apart from the aspect of touch and that the contact can be detected by itself. Most importantly, animals having the power of perception are similarly known to have the control of locomotion.

On the other hand, human beings have both the power of calculation and thoughts that result from a reasoned observation. Those having the capability of prediction are known to have several other factors while the others live just by imagination. In short, the converse does not hold in such circumstances.

There is not enough evidence concerning the power of observation in human beings and all other animals. However, whatever that differs is the type of soul. Observation is distinct from the opinions. It means that for one to be capable of viewing they must be capable of perceiving. However, the two are different. Some individuals have all such perception souls while others may have a single one. A similar assumption is also found in some areas concerning senses. For example, some animals may have several senses while others may have a single type of perception senses.

Where individuals live and perceive entails two meanings which is similar to the understanding of where they know. Such a case may, later on, mean either the soul or the knowledge. It follows that observation and sensation is a ratio of the essence and not a matter of the subject. From a given perspective, the term substance entails three meanings (Brennan & Brennan, 1997). They include the form, complex, matter or even both. The three are what are commonly known as the potentiality or rather the actuality.

The body of animals cannot primarily be the actuality of the soul, but instead, it is the soul which turns out to be the actuality of the body. Therefore, the correctness of the perception is that the soul cannot survive without the presence of the body. The soul is not the body but rather something which is relative to a body. Reflection is what confirms the aspect of observed fact and its actuality. The observation and reality of any object can only be achievable after focusing on the potentiality of that thing.

Perception also becomes the capacity of souls with the aims at differentiating plants from animals. For instance, having a perceptive faculty is known to be more definitive of being an animal and not a plant. Animals must have senses and perception if at all they will survive. Therefore, there is a rational way of treating animals as being inherently capable of perceiving objects. Most importantly, perception serves as the ending factor towards the maturity and growth of animals (Brennan & Brennan, 1997).

Conclusion

Our current understanding of perception and sensation is more complicated than the Plato and Aristotle's understanding on the same ideas. However, senses are not an incorrect position to adhere to since their theoretical aspects and concepts can neither be tested nor verified. The science of observation dramatically contributes to the acquisition of the knowledge. However, it is clear that the power of perception and sensation could not become what it is today without the ideas of Plato and Aristotle.

References

Brennan, J. F., & Brennan, J. F. (1997). Readings in the history and systems of psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.