Commentary: What is the extent of true knowledge?

Question:
What is the extent of true knowledge of our understanding and conscious processes?

The actual form of truth can only be its scientific system. Thus, philosophy must be part of science, that would include not just love of knowledge but also an actual knowledge. Some say that one does not necessarily have to understand the meaning of absolute, but feel and behold it. Hence when studying science, one should not just be governed by one's understanding but one should also feel, contemplate and be inspired by it.

Furthermore, the form of science and its systematic development includes a universal sign of clarity. Philosophy is esoteric (573/336), comprehensible, applicable for teaching and learning. Rational form of science is open to all and through the same path of rationality, it leads to the reasonable knowledge of the mind. The rational mind is the thought, and the universal “I” in general (381/237). Thus the esoteric philosophy values the rational reflective thinking, definite concepts and their determination.

Moreover, human cognition is sometimes considered as a tool that brings things out of darkness into the light of consciousness, and as a result, it (i.e., consciousness) processes and measures them. Knowledge can be considered as the environ through which individuals are able to observe things. The laws of this medium is altered by things; in which case, we do not know and will never know what they are. Although, we know just how they are to us or how we have to consider them. Both views at the knowledge are false; they are based on the dualistic doctrine. According to this doctrine, things and thinking, objectivity and subjectivity, things and consciousness, absolute and knowledge, are separated from each other. However, the duality is broken on the fact of progressive knowledge, because there is a movement from the fallacious to true knowledge.

Nevertheless, one may argue against the view that our own consciousness and direct experience are known to us. Since, what well-known is not necessarily mean that it is indeed known. Merging these two concepts may lead to self-deception, which may as a result interrupt the path of truth. And again, the truth is not a minted coin, which is given thus it could readily be put in the pocket.

Natural consciousness is only the concept of knowledge, but it is not real knowledge (47). This concept is the purpose of consciousness itself. It has to experience the reality of all of its knowledge or the truth of the acquired knowledge. Thus, it is necessary to compare the desired and achieved goals. Consciousness in itself is compelled to experiment with itself. And as a result, constant maintenance of all of these experiments would produce different results from the initial goals and assumptions.

At the heart of the development of consciousness, there is a feature that assimilates the truth, but since it may consist of nothingness, it faces its own rejection. The path is through the mind of doubt and despair, even if the consequence of the results is nothing but the consciousness of nothingness of all the results (47). Phenomenology itself, demonstrating the path certainly is applied to the total extent of knowledge in skepticism. This concept should not be taken nihilistically, as though all truths are reduced to zero. Inasmuch as, it is about a certain truth, which is experienced and endured, then acknowledges the finite and ceases. In the conclusive, it does not turn into zero, but transfer into a new and higher truth. Hence, the loss of any particular truth is the attainment of a new, and ultimate truth. The progress of knowledge has a negative character in the sense of the dialectical negation of the previous stage; via denying the transition ahead. However the path forward may not be futile and inane, since the limit that mind accomplishes would be the goal where it attains its peace and contentment.

Nevertheless, the phenomena of consciousness are like velamens that become more and more transparent. The consequent result should produce what underlies all these phenomena and actualizes them. Particularly, it is knowledge as such, pure, open, absolute knowledge. Here the subject is the notion and the notion equals to subject; they both match each other perfectly. Further, the subject must conform to its concept as an ideal. Consciousness is the same for itself, its own concept. Thus, consciousness must eventually return to itself. This result is an authentic knowledge of the consciousness of itself, i.e., its true identity.

Human life can be compared with the dialogue, as with the age, our views on people and things alter. This involuntary, but required alteration would be the lifetime experience of an individuum. Therefore, Hegel noted the course of development of consciousness, as the word dialectic or dialectical movement. This dialectical movement of consciousness progresses in itself as well as in its knowledge. As for consciousness, it follows the new true process of experience.