Is second-person relatedness a factor in the faculty of understanding? A philosophical, scientific, and theological study
<p>This thesis explores whether there are certain aspects to the faculty of understanding which are enabled (perhaps uniquely) through “second-person relatedness,” a mode of relation which purportedly obtains in situations where “I” relate to “you” in distinct ways. This relational mode was th...
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Weitere Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Abschlussarbeit |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2024
|
| Schlagworte: |
| _version_ | 1826314635242897408 |
|---|---|
| author | Fogassy, A |
| author2 | Pinsent, A |
| author_facet | Pinsent, A Fogassy, A |
| author_sort | Fogassy, A |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <p>This thesis explores whether there are certain aspects to the faculty of understanding which are enabled (perhaps uniquely) through “second-person relatedness,” a mode of relation which purportedly obtains in situations where “I” relate to “you” in distinct ways. This relational mode was the theme of Martin Buber’s celebrated book <em>I and Thou</em>, and in more recent years, it has become an increasingly important focus in experimental psychology, social neuroscience, philosophy, and theology.</p>
<p>Some accounts suggest that second-person relatedness aids in the achievement of <em>understanding</em> in a manner that cannot be substituted by other forms of learning. Understanding is usually characterized as a more holistic and interrelated quality than knowledge, yet, due to the rise of skepticism, modern epistemology has primarily focused on justification, namely, the issue of grounding certainty in knowledge, typically expressed in propositional form. On the other hand, some scholars have begun to orient their focus on what they view as the more difficult, yet superior, epistemic achievement of understanding – regarding natural truths of all kinds, and, purported Christian revelation.</p>
<p>On some accounts, situations involving second-person relatedness are important and may even be essential to the communication of understanding. These situations can be described in terms of joint attention, a phenomenon in which two persons “share awareness of the sharing of [their] focus” (Hobson, 2005). In what follows, I survey a range of objections to this view, before offering my own account, and responding to the objections.</p>
<p>In the account I develop, drawing from various researchers, I determine that joint attention is constitutive of second-person relatedness, and I showcase this special type of relatedness in diverse contexts of epistemic success, including theology, by means of Thomas Aquinas’ account of the intellectual gifts of the Holy Spirit. I conclude that second-person relatedness is indeed a crucial aspect of the communication of understanding, a conclusion which has implications for a wide variety of fields, including artificial intelligence.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-09-25T04:36:23Z |
| format | Thesis |
| id | oxford-uuid:b42a7e23-9e3b-4898-abdb-1364cff394c5 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-09-25T04:36:23Z |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:b42a7e23-9e3b-4898-abdb-1364cff394c52024-09-23T16:08:06ZIs second-person relatedness a factor in the faculty of understanding? A philosophical, scientific, and theological studyThesishttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06uuid:b42a7e23-9e3b-4898-abdb-1364cff394c5Knowledge, Theory ofPhilosophyKnowledge, Theory of, in childrenReligion and scienceKnowledge, Theory of (Religion)Philosophical theologyKnowledge and learningOther minds (Theory of knowledge)Philosophy of mindEnglishHyrax Deposit2024Fogassy, APinsent, AWynn, MConrad, RStump, E<p>This thesis explores whether there are certain aspects to the faculty of understanding which are enabled (perhaps uniquely) through “second-person relatedness,” a mode of relation which purportedly obtains in situations where “I” relate to “you” in distinct ways. This relational mode was the theme of Martin Buber’s celebrated book <em>I and Thou</em>, and in more recent years, it has become an increasingly important focus in experimental psychology, social neuroscience, philosophy, and theology.</p> <p>Some accounts suggest that second-person relatedness aids in the achievement of <em>understanding</em> in a manner that cannot be substituted by other forms of learning. Understanding is usually characterized as a more holistic and interrelated quality than knowledge, yet, due to the rise of skepticism, modern epistemology has primarily focused on justification, namely, the issue of grounding certainty in knowledge, typically expressed in propositional form. On the other hand, some scholars have begun to orient their focus on what they view as the more difficult, yet superior, epistemic achievement of understanding – regarding natural truths of all kinds, and, purported Christian revelation.</p> <p>On some accounts, situations involving second-person relatedness are important and may even be essential to the communication of understanding. These situations can be described in terms of joint attention, a phenomenon in which two persons “share awareness of the sharing of [their] focus” (Hobson, 2005). In what follows, I survey a range of objections to this view, before offering my own account, and responding to the objections.</p> <p>In the account I develop, drawing from various researchers, I determine that joint attention is constitutive of second-person relatedness, and I showcase this special type of relatedness in diverse contexts of epistemic success, including theology, by means of Thomas Aquinas’ account of the intellectual gifts of the Holy Spirit. I conclude that second-person relatedness is indeed a crucial aspect of the communication of understanding, a conclusion which has implications for a wide variety of fields, including artificial intelligence.</p> |
| spellingShingle | Knowledge, Theory of Philosophy Knowledge, Theory of, in children Religion and science Knowledge, Theory of (Religion) Philosophical theology Knowledge and learning Other minds (Theory of knowledge) Philosophy of mind Fogassy, A Is second-person relatedness a factor in the faculty of understanding? A philosophical, scientific, and theological study |
| title | Is second-person relatedness a factor in the faculty of understanding? A philosophical, scientific, and theological study |
| title_full | Is second-person relatedness a factor in the faculty of understanding? A philosophical, scientific, and theological study |
| title_fullStr | Is second-person relatedness a factor in the faculty of understanding? A philosophical, scientific, and theological study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Is second-person relatedness a factor in the faculty of understanding? A philosophical, scientific, and theological study |
| title_short | Is second-person relatedness a factor in the faculty of understanding? A philosophical, scientific, and theological study |
| title_sort | is second person relatedness a factor in the faculty of understanding a philosophical scientific and theological study |
| topic | Knowledge, Theory of Philosophy Knowledge, Theory of, in children Religion and science Knowledge, Theory of (Religion) Philosophical theology Knowledge and learning Other minds (Theory of knowledge) Philosophy of mind |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fogassya issecondpersonrelatednessafactorinthefacultyofunderstandingaphilosophicalscientificandtheologicalstudy |