Theory and Scholarly Thinking(Chapter I: The Premises of Social Democracy)

0. Theory and Scholarly Thinking

Every theory presupposes a mode of thinking that seeks to identify the essence underlying the disorderly phenomena that occur in the world. This mode of thought has existed continuously from the time when the thinkers of ancient Greece laid the foundations of science up to the present day. For this reason, in the realm of individual phenomena, there may occasionally and temporarily appear events that do not conform to the theory or even seem to contradict it. When a theory does not explicitly address such cases, this does not mean that it ignores them; rather, one must carefully consider, in each instance, why the essential movement does not manifest itself, while setting such exceptions aside when discussing the overall structure. Of course, if these phenomena are not exceptional but instead indicate that the existing theory failed to grasp the essence, the theory may need to be revised. Every theory is, after all, a hypothesis constructed from what we have known up to now, and it may be overturned when we perceive something previously unknown. At the same time, however, it would be mistaken to conclude from this possibility that the theory is therefore not grounded in reality.

This mode of thought is referred to here as scholarly thinking. In scholarly thinking, phenomena are generally divided into essence and appearance. For example, the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. This is an undeniable fact. However, it belongs not to essence but to appearance. As is well known, the sun is not actually moving from east to west; it merely appears to do so from a particular point on the rotating Earth. In this case, the fact that the Earth rotates is also true, but unlike the previous fact, it belongs to essence. And here, the essence—Earth’s rotation—explains the appearance—the sun’s movement. Thus, essence fundamentally possesses explanatory power over appearance.

Yet it is important to note that essence does not necessarily appear directly as a phenomenon. In the earlier example, the Earth’s rotation cannot be directly perceived because it is obscured by another essence, inertia. Since appearance always requires an observer, it can take various forms depending on the observer’s condition. Without understanding this relationship, one may be deceived by the illusion that essence and appearance must numerically coincide. For instance, it is entirely natural that the amount of light entering the eye does not numerically match the amount of light reflected by the object perceived.

When considering appearance from essence, one must always remain conscious of the observer—the perceiver.