Argumentative Essay: Idealism versus Realism
Introduction
The philosophy is the basis of human intellectual development because the knowledge provides mental infrastructure that operates in order to assist the humans in terms of understanding the world that exists around them. However, there are marked differences between the two leading schools of thought in this regard. According to Augustine, idealism is conventional approach towards gaining knowledge (Barnes, 237). The basic strings of idealism go back to the era of ancient Greeks who thought that their intellectual capacity was sufficient regarding accumulation of knowledge in the world (Page 116). Realism on the other side argues that human mind cannot influence the reality, and therefore, Cottingham argues that “the knowledge exists independent of corporeal wishes” (Page 26). The concept of evidentiary proof came into being under the head of realism. Realism understands the power of keeping things measurable, and they have to be quantifiable in order to exist in the space of the universe. Realism became a leading way of thinking in the modern era of the 21st century because of its focus on the need to back up claims, thoughts, beliefs, and hypotheses with hard evidence. Humanistic sciences did not have scientific nature in the past because they worked in the light of understanding of humans that was developed by others, and therefore, the resultant knowledge was substandard (Locke, 108). The substandard information did not provide managers with the power to effectively do their jobs because real situation was different from that reported in the literature.
Focus and Means of Inquiry in Idealism and Realism
The modern social scientists developed the notion of questionnaire in order to standardize the responses that they receive from the respondents. The statistical theory became a defining attribute of research methods that economic and social experts use in order to derive meaningful and concise results and conclusions. Realism and idealism are scientific and metaphysical in nature respectively. The humans are not the intellectual centers of the universe, and one has to prove his or her affection for others by doing something practical that everyone can see and feel. The contemporary times value the scientific nature of the constructs, and the modern psychological theories establish that promises are attitudes that need to be converted into actions before they can transform into behavioral realities. However, Idealism does not value empirical proof because human intelligence in the driving force in the intellectual arena created by idealism (Muntaner, 854). Both of the methods of thinking are not useless and they are not opposing to each other, but they have complimentary affect on each other. Idealism provides with foundations that one can use in order to build the construct of scientific theory. The inventions and innovations are created and conceptualized in the mind of the thinker. However, he or she must work in the light of natural laws and physical principles in order to convert his or her plans into touchable results.
Ethics in Both Schools of Thought
The nature and identity of ethics are quite divergent under idealism and realism. The formerly mentioned way of life urges that people are basically good, and bad behaviors occur in people because of external environment. Idealism provides groundwork for the development of positivist’s school of thought in the valuable field of criminology. The positivism delineates that humans are incapable of performing immoral acts, and therefore, they develop criminal behaviors due to justifiable reasons. In the given circumstances, the person considers his or her actions as ethical in nature. Human intelligence is the driving force behind the existence of idealism so humans can decide what is ethical and unethical for them on their own. Realism sets clear and understandable boundaries between illegal and legal actions (Walts , 28). The people do not have the power to decide what is right and wrong for them. However, judges and juries have such authorities. The police have to implicate suspects via development of logical cases against them in the court of law. Realism does not give permission to officials to suggest a person as accused based on their gut feelings. Furthermore, the law enforcement officials cannot use a person’s social and racial grounds against him or her in order to grow a legal case. The courts and judges want the police to present empirical and scientific evidence in order to win a conviction in the world of law.
The philosophy of idealism does have application in the area of arts and creative works. The arts and filmmaking are institutionalized frameworks that give the humans the strength to represent their thoughts and worldviews on canvas. There are multiple ways that one can use in order to let his or her emotions out into the world, and the methods in this regard include music, painting, and even dance of artistic nature. The art does not have any scientific nature, and therefore, one can free him or herself from the grants of conformity. The human need to express the emotions is adequately proven under the subunit of self-actualization requirements discussed in the theory of Maslow (Seelay, 321).
Economic Consequences of both the Philosophies: Value of Legal System
Idealism creates an unbelievable economic theory that recommends that people can apply whatever means necessary in order to attain their goals and objectives in the world of economics. Additionally, the idealist thinks that people are free and they have the right to choose. Realism does not agree with the basic argument of its counter philosophy because it bars personal liberties so that people cannot hurt others. The individuals cannot exercise their right to choose while, suppressing the needs of others. Realism focuses on the social and cultural concerns whereas; Idealism thinks that humans are perfectly capable of deciding their own destinies without any external assistance (Locke, 84). Idealism is the forbearer of individualistic behaviors, and Realism values a person’s freedoms in the established cultural and legal norms of the societies. The humans are social animals, and they have to live in groups in order to reach their optimal capacities. Idealism’s basic and fundamental argument is proven wrong by the modern psychology because it argued that people exhibit significant delinquent behaviors in the absence of control mechanism formed majorly by legislative forces of the communities. The liberalism has to operate within the confines of artistic world, but the concept will have the significant ability to cause social disasters if left lose in the communities of the modern world. The humans have to operate within the established norms of the communities because if they do not play by the rules then, they will have the power to circumvent the civil rights of others (Vayda, 274). The humans are not that good. Their goodness withers away when they have the strength to gain unfavorable advantage over others. Whenever, they have the ability to suppress the needs of others then, the legal system comes into play in order to snatch the undue political power, and attempts to restore the balance of social and economic strength in the communities by using difference legal remedies of varying natures and severities.
Idealism was a leading thinking style when humans have not developed their ability to integrate empiricalism in their lives. The intellectual development gave the abovementioned concept to flourish in all parts of the world, and nowadays, people are not willing to listen and entertain emotionally influenced thoughts and speeches. They want the governments to inform them about their effectiveness by crunching out numbers and figures. Idealism has limited application in the latest philosophical outlook of the world, as it impresses businesses and prisons to follow humanistic values while dealing with employees and inmates respectively.
Conclusion
Idealism and realism are fruits of the same tree. However, they are picks of different times. Idealism is the real deal, but the realistic school of thought is a latest version of the philosophy. Realism does not stop and prevent humans from thinking, but it requires them to follow unemotional and objective approach towards development of beliefs. Idealism works well in the department of arts and architecture because the field value human’s uniqueness. However, sciences have to expect the experts to work within the set parameters in order to reap maximum results. The management sciences that worked in the caves became a mainline professional field in the current period because they embraced the notions of objectivity, and scientific proof.
Works Cited
Barnes, Michel René. "Augustine in contemporary trinitarian theology."Theological Studies 56 (1995): 237 Online.
Cottingham, John G. Western Philosophy: An Anthology. New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2007. Online.
Locke, Don C. Perception and Our Knowledge of the External World. London: Allen & Unwin, 1967. Online.
Muntaner, Carles. "Invited Commentary: On the Future of Social Epidemiology—A Case for Scientific Realism." American Journl of Epidemiology 178. 6 (2013): 852-857. Online.
Seeley, Eric. "Human needs and consumer economics: the implications of Maslow's theory of motivation for consumer expenditure patterns." The Journal of Socio-Economics 21.4 (1992): 303–324. Online.
Vayda, Andrew. "Progressive contextualization: Methods for research in human ecology." Human Ecology 11.3 (1983): 265-281 Online.
Walts, Kenneth. "Structural Realism After the Cold war." International Security, 25.1 (2000): 5-41. Online.
