Discussion Questions and Weekly Reflections 3

Name:

Institution:

Course:

Tutor:

Date:

Discussion Questions and Weekly Reflections 3

Discussion Question 1:

In what ways do your reading assignments shed light on the cases Gawande (2008) describes in “The Itch”? What does the article suggest about the nature of medical knowledge and about knowledge in general? What steps might be required for the treatment described to become an accepted part of the practice of medicine?

From Gawande’s article, it can be deduced that medical knowledge and knowledge in general is complex and progressive. In addition, the article implies that perception rather than reception plays an important role in influencing the type of responses that persons in the medical field use to address emergent problems. However, the latter also provides a viable approach and needs to be explored accordingly. The conventional belief and perception that knowledge is progressive has further been reinforced by the article. Seemingly, the final response to the itching problem can be considered to have been contributed to by initial knowledge regarding the nature of the relative ailments.

Also worth mentioning is the fact that knowledge is a complex affair that is usually derive from multiple factors. In this article, M is exposed to a host of treatments that are basically geared towards relieving her itch (Gawande, 2008). However, the prepositions of the neurologist still provide a knowledge gap. Despite being rather simple and localized, the mirror box test offers the best option through which the ailment can be addressed accordingly. It only needs to be refined in order to be at par with the societal expectations and standards. Nevertheless, it is an affordable and effective treatment and marks a great achievement in this field of specification.

Reference:

Gawande, A. (June 30th 2008). The Itch. The New Yorker, 84 (19), 58.

Discussion Question 2:

In Book 2, Ch. XXXIII, 5-6, of “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding” (Moser & Vander Nat, p. 137-8), Locke discusses “strong combination(s) of ideas not allied by nature”. What are the implications of such ideas for Locke and for his goals as a philosopher? How can one tell the difference between such ideas and those truly “allied by nature”? Provide at least one example of a strong but questionable combination of ideas you see in your profession and discuss the effect it has had on learning and progress.

The strong combination of ideas not allied by nature had diverse implications on Locke’s philosophy as well as his goals as a philosopher. In particular, they influenced his way of thinking and made it significantly different from his fellow philosophers’ as well as the general public. Put differently, such ideas gives humans an upper hand with regards to understanding the philosophical underpinnings of different events and incidents as opposed to the general public. The ideas are also largely responsible for enabling Locke to attain his goals as a philosopher. This is because of their ability to align his way of thinking to philosophical principles.

The ideas that are not allied to nature can be differentiated from those that are truly allied by nature by the fact that while the latter have an intrinsic natural correspondence and tend to be similar, the former are diverse and influenced by secondary factors such as interests and education (Mallgrave, 2006). A typical example of strong and questionable ideas pertains to religion and includes: God exists and He resides in heaven. Notably, this set of ideas has undermined the progress of learning as it is the ultimate understanding in religion. Any efforts to confirm the ideas have been discouraged on the premise that it is sinful.

Reference:

Mallgrave, F. (2006). Architectural Theory. UK: Blackwell Publishing

Weekly Reflections

Another week has once more elapsed and my progress in epistemology seems to be compounded by certain complexities. The feedback from the professor seems discouraging as it is a clear indication that my progress is not impressive. I believe it is all inclined in my way of thinking that needs further fine tuning. In particular, I have experienced challenges while trying to put my thoughts in writing. Fortunately, I have been able to figure this out and hopefully, I will be able to address this shortcoming in the near future.

One of the articles that had a great impact on my wellbeing was Gawande’s The Itch. I literary began to itch when I read it. It offers useful insights with regards to the nature of knowledge and how gaps often occur. Most importantly, it challenges the medical personnel to become flexible with knowledge and explore other options in resolving emergent problems as suggested by Rorty (1981). Undoubtedly, the knowledge gained during the past week has been both inspiring and challenging.

Reference:

Rorty, R. (1981). Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: University Press.