philosophy

If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one around, a number of people will judge that it made noise, whereas the rest will suggests the possibility of the inexistence of noise, and as a result, the difference in perception of the two groups will suggests the possibility of the statement posing an epistemological problem. According to John Locke, in his analysis on the mode of operation of the human mind, the deduction on the possibility of the existence of noise is dependent on the perception and the understanding of the individual analyzing the situation. Therefore, in order to make an objective conclusion from the analysis of the statement, it is imperative to consider the differences in people’s perception prior to solving the epistemological problem. Consequently, the examination of the classical theories of philosophy is essential in the analysis of the puzzle. This is because there exist differences in human understanding and as such, the differences determine the outcome of the analysis.

The puzzle

For the case of the falling of the tree, the paper will use Locke’s conclusion in the analysis of the philosophical puzzle in order to help the readers make an objective deduction from the analysis of the epistemological statement. In the first step, the paper will examine the factors that make the statement an epistemological problem, after which classification theories will guide the readers in answering the puzzle. The objective will be to simplify the puzzle using the perspective of scholars who use classification theories in examining philosophical puzzles. As discussed in the paper, the falling of the tree makes the sound but the existence of the sound is subject to debate since John Locke’s view of human under...

... middle of paper ...

...are likely to disagree in many contexts but that is not the indicator of the reality in a situation. Arguing in support of the existence of the sound or in opposition of its existence does not necessarily surmount to accuracy but the context from which the argument is taking place (Locke 27). The only thing that is evident is quality of the experience, and in the case of the puzzle, knowing the quality of the experience is important in solving the puzzle.

In conclusion, Locke’s view has proved critical in answering the puzzles, but still it has created a situation that arouses further debate on the issue. It could have been wise for the philosopher remain impartial in making his deductions to limit the confusion created from the debate. The same should apply to analysis that tests the level of human understanding when solving epistemological problems.