Open Access

Article

Article ID: 1659

Hitting or being right

by Cristián Pérez García

Forum for Philosophical Studies, Vol.2, No.1, 2024; 15 Views

In this paper, we study Gettier’s problem based on some recent bibliography and new research advances. First, we set the terms of the discussion and expose the core of the problem. Many disputes on this topic are rooted in misapprehensions of the concept of knowledge. Therefore, we give the most common definition of knowledge and show its structure. Then we look at Gettier’s two cases and propose a new example that helps us clarify the nature of the problem. We use a case of induction because it gathers all the epistemological problems together so that its solution may be considered a complete one. Finally, incorporating recent advances in epistemology, we propose a solution to Gettier’s problem. Some situations that fit in the common definition of knowledge do not seem to also fit under the word “knowledge.” Through the study of a hypothetical case, in this article we shall propose a solution to this dissonance.

Open Access

Article

Article ID: 1403

Leaders (non-faculty) in higher education: A phenomenological study on understanding their role

by Saravanan Sathiyaseelan

Forum for Philosophical Studies, Vol.2, No.1, 2024; 59 Views

The higher education fraternity associates itself closely to academia; the environment or community concerned with the pursuit of research and education. Unsurprisingly, the faculty receive more attention in areas surrounding higher education. However, recent days are seeing vast evolutions in the higher education landscape, beginning with an escalating interest in a seamless and capable administration to support, strengthen and elevate both research and education goals to greater heights. This study used a qualitative phenomenological approach to examine fifteen leaders (non-faculty) working in mid-senior level positions in a university in Singapore to understand their role. The findings evidently proved that leaders (non-faculty) are facilitators and enablers who perform and complete their tasks by facilitating activities, processes, events, and interactions (to and for both students and faculty), and enabling an activity or implementing a policy. Furthermore, the findings reinforced the importance of such leadership within the higher education sector, especially at a time universities explore new strategies to diversify and gain competitive advantage in a challenging environment marked by globalization, technological disruptions, unpredictable demand, and changing student needs.

Open Access

Article

Article ID: 1386

A systematic design for AI-centered innovation management network by Marxist epistemology

by Qing Luo, Hexiu Cao

Forum for Philosophical Studies, Vol.2, No.1, 2024; 82 Views

By building AI-centered innovation management systems, innovative countries and organizations can optimize management processes, stimulate creativity, and accelerate product and service innovation cycles. AI-centered innovation management finds market in China. The application of Marxist Epistemology is applicable in breeding innovation knowledge, especially in defining AI-centered networks to guide innovation management, focusing on providing innovation conditions and the development of innovation relations. Furthermore, systematic entity of contradictions design is critical for AI-centered innovation management networks, unifying the systematic functions and structure by integrating AI into innovation management effectively.

Open Access

Article

Article ID: 452

Exploring the impact of response option sequences/order on survey rating scale responses

by Hamed  Taherdoost

Forum for Philosophical Studies, Vol.1, No.1, 2023; 290 Views

In the realm of survey data quality, inaccuracies and nonresponses pose significant challenges. One significant factor affecting this is the order in which response options are presented, leading to what is known as response order effects. This research delves into the extensive studies conducted on how the sequence of answer options influences respondents’ ratings in survey questions. Specifically, we focus on analyzing previous research to understand how the arrangement of scale points on a rating scale impacts the cognitive processes and reaction strategies of respondents. By synthesizing existing studies, this investigation aims to provide insights into the critical role that presentation sequence plays in shaping survey outcomes, thereby offering valuable perspectives for enhancing data quality in future survey designs.

Open Access

Article

Article ID: 489

Qualiomics: The metaphysics of consciousness

by Alfredo Pereira Jr.

Forum for Philosophical Studies, Vol.1, No.1, 2023; 241 Views

Assuming that conscious experience happens in the first-person perspective the study of its contents cannot be made by using the methods of empirical and formal quantitative sciences, since singular qualitative personal experiences remain outside their scope. Departing from the concept of Sentient Consciousness advanced in the ontology of Triple-Aspect Monism, I propose that lived experiences of qualitative states (‘qualia’) are subject to a new, non-scientific field of study, Qualiomics, corresponding to the Metaphysics of Consciousness. The main thesis of Qualiomics is that personal direct experiences of ‘qualia’ are experiences of the being of reality, not epiphenomena. The method of Qualiomics is knowing by means of lived experiences of feeling, instead of learning from revealed truth or from representations of experiences. In this paper I review some philosophical precursors, arguing that it has an affinity with Post-Modern Metaphysics, to be distinguished from Pre-Modern (Onto-Teo-Logical) and Modern (apriori thinking, focused on representations and clarification of concepts) Metaphysics. The being of reality is conceived as the Aristotelian Katholou that makes itself present when we have direct experiences of the Form of individual substances. Qualiomics is close to Existential Phenomenology, but not a revival of Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty, because it is necessary to take into consideration that scientific and technological achievements impact on our lives and expand the repertoire of ‘qualia’ that we can experience. It is also close to J. J. Gibson’s Theory of Direct Perception, as well as Pragmatist and Enactivist approaches to consciousness.

Open Access

Review

Article ID: 368

Technological innovation and public value creation: A multidisciplinary evaluation

by Omoregie Charles Osifo

Forum for Philosophical Studies, Vol.1, No.1, 2023; 108 Views

Innovation (e.g., technological, sustainable, social, etc.) should be able to create value. The key objective of this paper is to evaluate public value creation and improvement via technological innovations and present a general position. This paper adopts a simple evaluation strategy by exploring viewpoints/positions, dimensions, realities, and pieces of evidence in some selected relevant literature, documents, and reports. The multidisciplinary evaluation of how technological innovations help to create or improve public value shows a relatively similar outlook from the dimensions of objectives, strategies, limitations, and outcomes/successes. One of the key discoveries from this paper relating to the objective dimension in the disciplines of social sciences is that tech innovation mainly focuses on enhancing well-being, dignity, human rights, and prosperity for all (individuals, societies, the environment, and the world). Concerning the objective dimension in the disciplines of the humanities, tech innovation focuses on promoting cultural diversity, inclusion, and responsible communication. Regarding the objective dimension in disciplines of physical and natural sciences, tech innovation focuses on reducing/eradicating dehumanization, social, economic, psychological, and environmental challenges (e.g., climate change and biodiversity depletion). The originality of this paper is premised on the fact that presently very little attention is given to this kind of topic, especially from a multidisciplinary perspective. Therefore, this paper attempts to contribute to the multidisciplinary evaluation gap that exists between technological innovation and public value creation. The general position of this multidisciplinary evaluation is that public value creation is the key goal of tech innovation across many disciplines.