Re:Ed Manak (4/19)

Q:Is there, in fact, a difference between experience and conceptualization?

Throughout the past week we have analyzed the works of Ernst Von Glaserfeld and what radical constructivism is. He presents a debatable question in which can we experience anything that is not conceptualized, such as an unconceptualized apple? In general I believe we can experience a conceptualized apple because we know the physical properties in which it is round, red, and derives from an apple tree. However on the other hand, can we experience and unconceptualized apple and if we can, what is an unconceptualized apple? When the term unconceptualized comes to my mind, I envision something that is foreign to me, something that I cannot even envision whatsoever. For example something that was unconceptualized to me about a year ago was the subject of philosophy because I did not know what the subject was or even what the main goals of philosophers are because I had never taken a course in this discipline. There was no concept even thought of and thus this subject was unconceptualized as of last year and before. However once I had taken a philosophy course, the concept of the subject was conceptualized and I understood what philosophy is, what the main concepts of the discipline are, and the message philosophers are trying to send. In regards to an unconceptualized apple, I would believe there is no such thing to many individuals because we know what an apple is and we can envision the concept of an apple. But there are a certain number of individuals that do not know what an apple is such as new born babies and toddlers. The reason why is because they are far to young to understand what an apple actually is but they may know what it is but pictorially and not what it actually is. Also Dr. Johnson states that there is no such thing as unconceptualized apples because there is no concept of an unconceptualized apple. The reason why is because it violates the principles of truism is because how can there be no concept of an apple that is not a concept. This whole topic just sounds like a double negative and is extremely confusing. Truly when Ernst Von Glaserfeld tries to prove his point with this subject it seems as he knows the he is wrong but still tries to defend his points, which he does a great job of.

Now to get back to your question Ed, I believe that experience and conceptualization are not synonymous because these are two completely different words but they do correlate with each other. In one case experience is a particular instance of personally encountering or undergoing something while conceptualization is when the mind mentally forms a concept (an idea of something formed by mentally combining all its characteristics or particulars). However wouldn't anyone have to experience something before it is even conceptualized. Such as in the case of apples, how would you be able to form a concept about an apple before if it is not experienced. For example if I was foreign to what apples were, how would you describe it to me, and if so would it be described through experience? Experience through description would probably be the easiest way for anyone to from a concept. Personally in my current anatomy course you can describe what a heart or an organ is but how will I know what a heart or an organ (specific) looks like? There must be pictures involved to even envision what a heart truly is and better yet, to experience what a heart actually is through laboratory dissection would form a complete concept in anyone's mind would be the ideal goal.