Extract
[...] It is then a matter of realizing a hypothesis, to confirm it through experimentation. 2and paragraph: On the contrary, one must always be wary of one's experience, which can be deceptive and blind us in the search for true knowledge. Main idea of the antithesis: Experience does not always guarantee competence, it is also a source of errors. 1er argument (objection or refutation of a point of the thesis): Sensory experience does not bring us an image in line with reality, but a distorted image. Cf. Plato's myth of the cave. [...]
[...] By allowing us to develop a know-how, the experience would indeed bring us a deep knowledge on the subject. But we must not be blinded by the experience which can give us the illusion of being the source of skills. Definitive answer to the question: In reality, it is necessary to distinguish the conditions of fertility in which the competence guarantees, where not all forms of competence. Opening question: We can now question the potentially liberticidal character of the experience that imprisons us in the lived experience rather than opening us up to new ideas. [...]
[...] Does experience guarantee competence? Introduction In general, it seems obvious that an individual's experience brings a certain level of competence, regardless of the field. In fact, experience, which can be defined as the practice of something, without necessarily theoretical teaching, allows an individual to benefit from a know-how. At first glance, this experience seems to be able to bring a deep knowledge, to the point that it gives him the right to decide or judge. From then on, an individual who has no experience in a field, could not claim to have the same level of competence. [...]
[...] Main idea of the thesis: Experience truly guarantees competence. Competence, that is to say, the in-depth knowledge of a subject, is not conceived solely through laws and a theoretical system, but first and foremost through the matter. Now, experience is precisely this necessary point of contact with reality. First argument built around a definition of concept: One cannot reduce everything to scientific knowledge. If in some fields, theoretical knowledge is necessary, in others, only experience is necessary. Kant shows that only observable phenomena can be the subject of scientific knowledge. [...]
[...] 3and paragraph: Finally, lived experience is the only domain where one truly learns something, and where our real competence is formed, under certain conditions. Main idea of the synthesis (nuance or distinction) It is not a matter of opposing theory and experience, but of considering experience as an extension of theoretical knowledge, necessary to build real competences. 1er argument (objection or refutation of a point of the antithesis): Theoretical knowledge aims to return to reality. And the extension of science is precisely this anchoring point with reality that characterizes experience. We must not oppose experience and science. [...]
