The Theory Of The Tracking Theory

the incessant brutality of racism in the 1920s. Rolf de Heer’s 2002 art house feature film The Tracker, represents one of the most “unspeakable aspects of Australian history” (Smaill, 2002, 31), explicitly depicting the extreme racism, violence and inhumanity the egotistical European invaders inflicted on Aboriginals, whilst at the same time glorifies and treasures aboriginal culture and intelligence through film.

Do you ever wonder if you know anything? In his argument for skepticism, Peter Unger, states that “nobody ever knows anything to be so” (Unger, Pg. 42). If this were to be true, can one be certain that one knows things about oneself, the world one lives in, and about others? In fact, through the use of different methods, one can indeed know things about oneself, the world one lives in, and about others, which is why Peter Unger’s argument for skepticism can’t be true.

In his book, Heraclitean Fire: Journeying on the Path of Leadership, Dr. Michael Cary (1999) introduces us to the theory of the five frames for effective leadership. Organizational life is filled with an abundance of unique challenges and conflict. The Five Frames model serves as a valuable tool to leadership by revealing the alternate perspectives of organization members. According to Carey (1999) “These five frames – rational, human, systems, political, and cultural – offer different angels for looking at organizational life, and each frame’s proposed outline of the key dynamics of situations does have value in understanding why things happen the way they do and what must be a part of any plan to make things better” (p. 91).

The different perspectives create interest and draw us into the experiences of others. The two texts, ‘The Tracker’ composed by Rolf De Heer and ‘Bran Nue Dae’ composed by Rachel Perkins explores this notion. Both films are evident to the racial discrimination of Aborigines in Australia. ‘The Tracker’ is a 2002 art house film set in 1922. It is clear that there were no Aboriginal rights and which white settlement had the greatest control. ‘Bran Nue Dae’ is a 2009 musical/comedy/drama film set in 1969 about the beginning of Aboriginal rights.The different perspectives are from Colonial/Indigenous people. The voices were through the role of the characters, the genre, the music and the cinematography.

This leads us to our next premise, premise II, which states there are rational beliefs that are not supported by sufficient evidence. Clark identifies these rational beliefs as those acquired through sensory experience and beliefs that are self-evident. He supports this premise by giving examples of some of these beliefs “..The sky is blue, grass is green ..”(139). He goes on to say, “ ...every proposition is either true or false..”(139). I think that by Clark including these examples of beliefs through sensory experiences and self-evidence, he seems to be saying that through our experiences, one can acquire beliefs even if our beliefs are false. It is rational to believe that the sky is blue because it is a belief we acquire through seeing the sky is blue. But according to Clark, seeing that the sky is blue is not enough sufficient evidence (like the sufficient

The false belief is not accounted for by the persons cultural or religious background or his/her intelligence. The client experiencing this will hold on firmly to the belief regardless of the evidence to the contrary, the client is absolutely convinced that the delusion is real. Delusion are symptoms of either medical, neurological or mental disorder.

Vogel’s second premise draws from the underdetermination principle. This principle is the idea that if there is no reason to believe one

Edmund Gettier’s argument that justified true belief is not a sufficient definition for knowledge is correct. There are many scenarios in which the conditions for justified true belief are met but cannot be said to qualify as knowledge; therefore justified true belief is not a sufficient definition for knowledge.

In Peter Elbow’s essay “The Doubting Game and Believing Game” he discusses the two types of games that an individual can use to look for the truth in a situation. The Doubting game, is when an individual believes everything is false, and prove each assertion wrong, and the Believing game, is the process where an individual believes that all assertions are correct, and go over each one separately. With both games, there are certain rules that must be followed.

William James (1897), on the other hand, attempts to define the permissible cases in which it is intellectually respectable to believe without sufficient evidence. James (1897) begins by providing three criterion for judging beliefs: either beliefs are 1) living or dead; 2) forced or avoidable; or 3) momentous or trivial.

One of the great issues with the psychoanalytic approach is falsifiability. Popper (1969, 1972) claimed, there should be at least some evidence that can contradict the claims

In his lecture, “The Will to Believe,” William James addresses how one adopts a belief. There is a hypothesis and an option, where you choose between two live hypotheses. An option has the characteristics to be live or dead, forced or avoidable, and momentous or trivial. In his thesis, James argues how “our passional nature” must make our decisions about our beliefs when they cannot be certainly determined on “intellectual grounds,” however, this is not the case, we can always make the decision based on intellectual grounds. One can use Bayesian probability to gain some grasp of the situation and eventually to make a decision.

William Kingdon Clifford’s argument in “The Ethics of Belief” that it is morally wrong to form beliefs upon insufficient evidence has been widely debated. One such objection to Clifford is William James’s “The Will to Believe,” which argues, under certain circumstances, it can be morally justified to form beliefs without adequate evidence. In this paper, I shall argue that James’s position on belief is stronger than Clifford’s on the basis of being able to reveal more truths while not violating morality.

False belief can best be explained by putting it into a wider context of the ‘Theory of Mind’. Theory of Mind was first proposed in a study observing the behaviour of chimpanzees by Premack and Woodruff (1978). Soon after, Theory of Mind became a well-known concept in the field of psychology. Simon Baron-Cohen (e.g. 1989, 2001) used it to conceptualize autism. He defines ToM, often abbreviated ToM and often referred to as ‘mindreading’ (Whiten, 1991), or ‘mentalizing’ (Frith, Morton, & Leslie, 1991), as being able to understand that other people have beliefs, intentions, emotions, and desires which drive their actions and which are different to the ones we have. When describing ASD children, he then refers to them as

This section provides us with two selections from the essays of William K. Clifford (1845-1879) and William James (1842-1910). Clifford's essay, The Ethics of Belief, is based on the concept of evidentialism. This concept 'holds that we should not accept any statement as true unless we have good evidence to support its truth'; (Voices of Wisdom, 346). James wrote his essay, The Will to Believe, as a response to Clifford's essay where he endorsed a philosophy called pragmatism.