Journeyman Philosopher

On my last post I ended with the questions ‘But what if any is better? And is it even possible to be a realist?’

Well on to answer those questions. First let’s deal with ‘Is it possible to be a realist?’ Well in order to determine this we must first know what one is, as so I turn to the dictionary for two basic definitions to give us a framework. A realist is by definition ‘the attitude or practice of accepting a situation as it is and being prepared to deal with it accordingly’ and/or ‘the quality or fact of representing a person, thing, or situation accurately or in a way that is true to life’.’

As it is’ and ‘true to life’ are the most important aspects of the definition. Well what is it to know/represent something ‘as is’ or ‘true to life’? To use our previous example; if we see a cup we just think its a cup. No judgement calls are made about the cup, it is just as it is.

Allright let’s do something more interesting most of us can relate to. Let’s say we see a cop speeding without his lights on, and then we decide to have a conversation about it.

Two realists would say “That cop is speeding without his lights on.” “I saw.”

A realist and a pessimist would say “That cop is speeding without his lights on.” “Stupid pigs always breaking the law for their own benefit.”

A realist and a optimist would say “That cop is speeding without his lights on.” “I bet he’s going to a crime in progress, and he thought this would be more subtle.”

In this situation all optimism and pessimism add is positive and negative speculation. Speculation, however, would be deemed necessary in most situations. Perhaps realist accounts would be bearable if all the information was available and speculation wasn’t necessary but that rarely happens.

If we consider a situation in which an individual needs to make a judgement call, let’s say to invest in a company. A realist would look at the companies history and say “This company did this on this date, and it was benificial. This on that date, and it was detrimental. And this on etc…” A optimist would look at the companies history and say “This company has shown good. I’m guessing that that will continue on into it’s future. I should consider investing.” A pessimist would look at the companies history and say “This company has a shady past. I don’t think I should invest.” I think the important thing here is that it seems as if the realist is not capable of making a judgement call. As soon as he says “Well this happened so maybe/I think…” he’s making a judgement call which would be weighted either in a positive or a negative manner.

Hmmm. Let me back step. In order to make a decision when some facts are unavailable (and sometimes when they all are present) we require what would be considered a judgement call. Judgement call’s are based on facts present in the case but as well on a premonition of the individual making the judgement call. Such a premonition requires a base beyond the ‘as is’ and ‘true to life’ knowledge in the situation (which is necessary for a realist account). Realists cannot do this, thereby they cannot make a judgement call.

Therefore, seemingly, a realist account would be applicable to situations in which we had all the factors (for example; Mathematics, Basic Scientific equations, Well recorded history, etc.), however most of our life decisions don’t revolve around these facts. Thereby it would seem as if realism although a theoretically possible stance would be incompatible with any life style that required judgement calls to be made beyond the facts.

Wow, that was longer then I thought it would be. So anyhow if realism isn’t viable which is better optimism or pessimism? I will take a look at this shortly.