Amy asked:

I have been set a question in my theory of knowledge class which has to be answered in the form of
an essay. I need a starting point to begin the essay, and would be very grateful if you have any
thoughts or suggestions regarding the topic. The question is:

"Compare and evaluate the ways in which literature on the one hand and the human sciences on the
other may help us to know and understand human behaviour."

Human science looks at a person from the outside, as he is in relation to his environment.
Psychologists formulate and test theories based upon externally describable behaviour of subjects.
Accounts of conditions which cause motivation or stress, for example, are based upon the reactions
of subjects given external stimuli, i.e. questions and particular situations which are manufactured in
order to elicit responses. Responses and behaviour become the data for theories. This helps us to
"know and understand" human behaviour as it directly relates to the outside world. However, human
beings are extremely complex and a great deal of our internal life is not testable in a scientific
environment.

Doubts can be raised about whether psychology provides us with "knowledge" because the data
upon which theories are based is limited, and the data is also the evidence. Nevertheless,
philosophers recognise that psychology is an account, if not a science, of human behaviour.

Literature helps to know and understand human behaviour differently, because we are given access
to it from the inside. Although we are reading about fictional rather than real characters, a great writer
can show us the workings of the mind, which we can often know to be true simply because we are
moved by them. Literature can provide us with both a deep knowledge of the internal moral struggles
of mankind and insights into the inner nature of man and how he comes to know things.

There is a passage in Tolstoy's Anna Kareninawhich illustrates the subjective states of recognition,
the coming to know the truth about another person and how this can adjust one's knowledge of
oneself.

In the passage, Anna Karenina is dangerously ill. Her husband, Karenin, and her lover, Vronsky, are
both at her bedside. Karenin has not previously acknowledged that Vronsky is his wife's lover, but
now does so simply by allowing his presence at the bedside. Vronksy has always believed Karenin to
be cold and unloving and that Anna needed his, Vronksy's, love. Vronsky's views of Karenin seem to
be born out by the picture: Karenin stands coolly at the bedside, Vronsky weeps passionately over
Anna. But suddenly Vronsky looks up at Karenin and his eyes are opened, he sees the truth. Karenin
appears to him in a new light, as strong, kind, and dignified. Karenin is allowing Vronsky to weep over
his wife which he would only have the strength to do if he possessed a true love for Anna, and his
superiority to Vronsky is apparent — to us and to Vronsky himself — in his ability to detach himself
from his feelings and simply watch Vronsky's passion. I adore this passage! /P>

What we learn from this scene is that Vronsky has made a false moral assessment of Karenin, and
he comes to know this in a real life situation although not simply on the basis of Karenin's behaviour.
On the basis of Karenin's standing calmly by, Vronsky could continue to believe that Karenin was cold
and unloving. But he recognised, in Karenin, and in contrast to himself, something which was great.
Vronsky will, at the same time, have changed his knowledge of his own nature. How this knowledge
and understanding comes about cannot be described scientifically, and it is not the sort of experience
which could be achieved under observational conditions used by psychologists. Of course, Tolstoy
cannot describe it himself, but he can show us and provide us with an understanding of how others
operate, and can change, internally. We achieve a greater understanding and knowledge of human
weakness, the place of passion in love, and we see what a moral change can be. Here, the moral
change is the un-self centred recognition of the true nature of another person.

There are particular facets of human nature that we can learn from literature and even if we don't
undergo many of the experiences which literature can show us, to come to know of them is to have
an increased, expanded, deepened knowledge of mankind.

Rachel Browne