Epistemology is the New Critical Thinking To students, words spoken from professors are to be taken down as fact almost without question. The words spoken may not even be facts, but a professor’s opinion but there is no difference when students are taking notes and a test is closing in. The speed at which this must be accomplished leaves no time for the students to even question the credibility of their professor’s statements let alone form their own. To do so would be treading upon the fields of epistemology which can be described as understanding how we come to realize that something is true like “the Earth is round”, or a value that should be upheld like “it is unethical to harm a random bystander”. (Ellerton, 2017) Fortunately, the processes …show more content…
Epistemology like described earlier, is the science behind accepting knowledge that has been given to us. Scientific method is a common method used to ask questions about things we have yet to understand and acquiring knowledge about those questions. Epistemology then comes in to question if the way scientific method answered that question was in fact, rational, or correct itself instead of just blindly accepting the results. The goal of epistemology is not to challenge scientific facts or beliefs. Ellerton (2017) explains this well by saying “epistemology serves not to adjudicate on the credibility of science, but to better understand its strengths and limitations and hence make scientific knowledge more …show more content…
Objectivity can be literally defined as lacking bias, judgment or prejudice. However, in the epistemological sense it means that an object has a scientifically researchable truth inside of it. (Crotty, 1998, p. 5) These methods consist of sampling, measurements, scaling, statistical analysis and many other methods. Objectivity attempts to find data or information that is perceived similarly no matter who it is presented to. The challenges to objectivity are not mainly to their acquired knowledge but the credibility of the tests used to obtain it. Objectivity also struggles to analyze certain situations that do not yield definite quantitative data for example, how different cultures perceive honor killings. To do so an objectivist must acknowledge that the answer is subjective to the person being questioned and then stay objective enough to record the data
In the essay, “Other Voices, Other Rooms” from Inquiry to Academic Writing, Gerald Graff argues that students learn things differently from class to class and are not taught to use information from one class in another. This is a problem especially in higher education today because there is such a large gap from professor to professor. Although the disagreement from one subject to the next may seem like a problem to some, if there were no disagreements, nothing would be worth learning. While these problems may occur, they are essential in the evolvement of education. Without these disagreements there would not be any search for more information to solve the problems. Also, students would not be motivated to continue to learn. The disagreements between the two are what seem to confuse students, but what confuses them more is how the education system is set up. Students must learn to make
Freeman, N. (2011). Credibility and the Professor: The Juxtaposition of Student Perceptions and Instructor Beliefs. Retrieved May 10, 2014 from http://centralspace.ucmo.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10768/13/NFreemanFINAL.pdf?sequence=1
Many people would go as far as to say that a professor’s job is to deliver knowledge to students, and a student’s job is to absorb it, without reservation. Pirsig emphasizes how this relationship can fail through his description of Phaedrus’ time in the interdisciplinary Ph.D. program at the University of Chicago. One student in Phaedrus’ philosophy class questions Aristotle’s views of rhetoric stating that within the text, “‘There are some dubious statements,’” and the professor responds, “‘We are not here to learn what you think…We are here to learn what Aristotle thinks,’” (Pirsig 371). Basically, Pirsig is saying that there is a problem with the conventional professor-student relationship. This is because when a professor begins to feel vulnerable, like in the situation above, the professor transforms into a sovereign leader. When students live under an oppressive regime in the classroom they find themselves incapable to learn on their own terms. I agree that this relationship does need to change, a point that needs emphasizing since so many believe that if the system has operated this long, it can continue to work. I think Phaedrus is mistaken because he overlooks the real reason why the student is struggling with the professor. The issue that this lone student and Phaedrus both experience is that they are confronting the knowledge that the Professor has avowed individually. Instead, to gain more use out of the knowledge John Henry Newman would argue that these students should work with others. This will enable them to, “to adjust together the claims and relations of their subjects of investigation,” (Newman 77). Newman would surely extend this same argument that collaboration must take place between opinions on a certain subject matter, such as Aristotle. The adjustment of claims, which Newman discusses, improves education for the student. Their
“This Course prepares students for reading, research, and writing in college classes by teaching students to consider the rhetorical situation of any piece of writing while integrating reading, research, and writing in the academic genres of analysis and argument. This course is said to teach students to develop analyses and arguments using research-based content with effective organization, and appropriate expression and mechanics”. (1)
In “The Epistemic Significance of Disagreement”, Thomas Kelly gives two responses to the question “How should awareness of disagreement, with those that you take to be your epistemic equal, effect the rational confidence you have in your beliefs?”. Kelly discusses two possible responses to the question. The first is Richard Foley's first person perspective argument. Adam Elga calls the second the right reasons view (Elga, 2007 pg. 485). Kelly pursues the latter, and does not go further than agreeing with Foley that we should only view these disputes with a first person perspective.
Students face “an ocean of information” today, much of it of poor quality, so a better approach would be to teach students how to “triangulate” a source like Wikipedia, so they could use other sources to tell whether a given entry could be trusted. “I think our goal should be to equip students with the critical thinking skills to judge.”
Nursing research has been a part of the nursing profession for many years, consisting of both qualitative and quantitative research. It is essential in guiding nursing practice. Many nurses have a baseline understanding of research in general, but when conducting research it is important also to understand personal values and beliefs to guide the type of research to conduct. Understanding the differences between epistemology, methodology, and methods, will assist in this choice to conduct a valid research project.
...the anthropological and other social sciences the basis for forming non-biased studies results that can be respectfully referenced and relied upon for their integrity.
The epistemological concept questions “how do I know?” The epistemological dimension is how we view the assumptions of knowledge to decide what to believe (Marcia, 2008, p2). The way in which information is delivered affects how it perceived by those who receive the information. Intrapersonal dimension is how we chose and adopt the values and beliefs that we decide to live by (Marcia, 2008, p8). For example, as a student in the first phase of self-authorship, I seek my values and beliefs according to seeking acceptance from those around me, while others who may be further down the process chose their values and beliefs according to who they are. Interpersonal dimensions is the connection between yourself and with others (Marcia, 2008, p9). It is the understanding of others views and developing a mature and respectful way to interact with everyone. “Complex epistemological, intrapersonal, and interpersonal development is necessary for adults to build complex belief systems, to form a coherent sense of identity, and to develop authentic, mature relations with diverse others (Baxter Magolda, 2001).” Within this course, I believe that we have learned a bit of all of three dimensions. Reading the
This essay starts with definition of traditional epistemology, followed by an explanation of how class, gender, and race can affect what one can know. Traditional epistemology can be defined as all knowers, regardless of who you are or what your social situation is, are bound by the same cognitive norms. (lecture) Charles Mills however, in the article “Alternative Epistemologies”, argues that who you are and your social situation change your access to knowledge. He criticizes that traditional epistemology fails to consider how an individual’s social situation can affect what he can know. Those in non-dominant social groups have epistemic access especially for knowing about oppression. In this essay I will attempt to explain Mills argument
Today we have the world at our fingertip, literally with the internet, we can search for anything and have an answer within seconds. However, the information we receive may be wrong., and that can make a person look foolish. Being wrong on a piece of trivial information is one thing, but being wrong in an area of expertise can have dire consequences. One of which is loss of reputation, this can lead to loss of a job and the inability to get a new one. Another, is loss of credibility, if an educator loses credibility the students will discount his or her teaching, questioning the educator’s knowledge. Because, a teacher can lose believability they must have sources that are reliable, credible, and unbiased. They need to look at the author, the
Epistemology helped me investigate the procedure I went through for crafting the essays. I referred to books, online articles, journal and other publications to understand and justify the concepts and information. It helped me distinguish between what is false, what is true across diverse contexts, and to decide the boundaries of knowledge based on how that knowledge is acquired. I also evaluated the truthfulness of my beliefs and personal opinion. I am actuated by understanding the sources of knowledge and also the quality of the resulting knowledge – knowing its dimensions and limitations.
Epistemology, also known as theory of knowledge is the part of philosophy that discusses the nature and scope of knowledge. Some questions that study the nature of knowledge could be, Have you ever thought about how we know things? What does it mean for someone to know something? How much can we possibly know? How do you know that 2 + 2 = 4, or that the square root of 144 is 12? Do we know something from reason or from di...
Morality involves what we ought to do regarding right and wrong and/or good and bad based on our values, virtues and principles (Gray, JW). Something is moral if it is the right thing to do or rational thing to do based on the facts presented in a situation. Objectivity is the state or quality of being true even outside of one’s individual biases, interpretations, and feelings (Wikipedia). Objective decisions are ones that are not based on personal feelings or opinions, but instead it is based on the circumstances and facts presented when considering a particular decision. I shall argue that morality that is case-by-case or situational can still be objective without universal or general rules.
Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with the theory of knowledge. Epistemology studies the nature of knowledge, justification, and the rationality of belief. Much of the debate in epistemology centers on four areas: the philosophical analysis of the nature of knowledge and how it relates to such concepts as truth, belief, and justification, various problems of skepticism, the sources and scope of knowledge and justified belief, and the criteria for knowledge and justification. Epistemology addresses such questions as "What makes justified beliefs justified?", "What does it mean to say that we know something?" and fundamentally "How do we know that we know?"