For some people science is the supreme form of all knowledge. Is this view reasonable or does it involve a misunderstanding of science or of knowledge?
For many persons science is considered the supreme form of all knowledge, as science is based on facts and theories and it reaches its results through an approved scientific method. Consequently, it seems to be objective and thus more truthful and reliable. However, other persons argue that this is a misunderstanding of science. Hence, one should question what science and knowledge entail. Can there actually be some form of knowledge that overrules all other types of human knowledge? Is scientific knowledge actually always objective? Are there other types of knowledge of equal worth? This essay will discuss the views presented mainly using examples from biology and history and comparing them to the different ways of knowing, i.e. perception, reasoning, emotion and language to try and reach a conclusion on whether scientific knowledge really is a higher form of knowledge.
Firstly, before attempting to discuss the topic at hand, it is important to define the terms “knowledge”, “science” and “supreme”. According to Webster’s Encyclopaedic Dictionary “knowledge” is defined as “the acquaintance with facts, truths, or principles gained by sight, experience, or investigation”1. “Science” is a branch of knowledge that has purpose to “describe, explain, understand, investigate, predict, and control”2. The term “supreme” is defined as “the highest in rank, authority, and/or quality”3. Now, to put these definitions in context, one must recognise that scientific knowledge, to have the status of the highest in authority and quality, it has to be reliable and consistent with reality. And since scientific knowledge is based upon investigations and observations of the environment around us (i.e. reality), it must be supreme. However, what can be questioned is the degree of supremacy within different types of sciences, and in this essay the comparison will be limited to one natural science (biology) and one social science (history).
Biology could be considered the supreme form of knowledge, as a large proportion of what we know is based upon observations and investigations of the world around us, thus inductive reasoning. Let’s consider the example of organs in living organisms; it’s a scientific fact that most living org...
... middle of paper ...
... our perceptions, way of reasoning, and the language used, thus the scientific knowledge we have created is also subjective.
Bibliography Books
Abel, Reuben. Man Is the Measure. New York; The Free Press, 1976.
Acton, Edward. Rethinking the Russian Revolution. Arnold Publishers, 1990.
Pipes, Richard. Den Ryska Revolutionen. Stockholm; Natur och Kultur, 1990.
Dictionaries
Webster’s Encyclopaedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language. 1989, Gramerce Book, New York.
1 Webster’s Encyclopaedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language. 1989, Gramerce Book, New York. p. 792.
2 Abel, Reuben. Man Is the Measure. New York; The Free Press, 1976. p. 82
3 Webster’s Encyclopaedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language. 1989, Gramerce Book, New York. p. 1430.
4 Pipes, Richard. Den Ryska Revolutionen. Stockholm; Natur och Kultur, 1990. p. 161
5 Acton, Edward. Rethinking the Russian Revolution. Arnold Publishers, 1990. p. 238
6 Abel, Reuben. Man Is the Measure. New York; The Free Press, 1976. p. 82
© Copyright 2005 Cassandra Flavius (FictionPress ID:375156). All rights reserved. Distribution of any kind is prohibited without the written consent of Cassandra Flavius.
Papers on Language and Literature 33:3 (1993). 325-333. The. Ragen, Brian.
Simpson, J. A., and E. S. C. Weiner. The Oxford English dictionary. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1989.Print.
Merriam Webster. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary of English. Ed. Frederick Mish. 11 th.
2 Delbridge, A., Bernard, J. R. L., Blair, D., Peters, P., Butler, S., Eds., The Macquarie Dictionary, Second Ed., Macquarie: Macquarie, 1995, p. 826.
Pearsall, J. (ed) 1999, The Concise Oxford Dictionary, Oxford University Press, New York, p. 1209.
Berube, Margery S., et all; The American Heritage Dictionary Second Edition; Houghton Mifflin Company; Boston, Mass, 1985
"Oxford English Dictionary." Search Results - Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press. Web. 19 Mar. 2011. .
The New International Webster's Pocket Dictionary of the English Language. Naples, FL: Trident International, 2002. Print
Earlier Science was treated as an institution but now, it includes many things like "scientific experiments, "theories" etc. The authors argue that this knowledge should viewed in terms of "socially constructed" and not the one known as "scientific truth". This article points that in the social constructivist view, the 'science' it is just another system of knowledge which contains empirical researches and studies. It is basically concerned with what is "truth", how it has emerged, accepted and explained in social domain. ...
Webster’s Desk Dictionary of the English Language. New York: Portland House. 1990. Dictionary. Page 602
Knowledge is something that can change day to day, which can be learned through both the natural and human sciences. Knowledge changes in the natural sciences when an experiment is conducted and more data has been gathered. Knowledge changes in human sciences when patterns are recognized in society and further tests have been conducted. Does our knowledge of things in the natural and human sciences change every day? I think that our knowledge grows everyday but does not necessarily change every day. The areas of knowledge that will be discussed in this essay are natural and human sciences. In History we can see that at one point something that was considered knowledge then transformed into different knowledge, especially in the natural sciences. However, in the past, due to lack of technology, it might have been more of a lack of knowledge that then turned into knowledge on the topic.
Pearsall J (1999) The Concise Oxford Dictionary Tenth Edition page 286 by Oxford University Press in Oxford New York, America
The issue that arises in this discussion is that is there a valid difference between science and other types of knowledge or are they both interrelated in some specific terms? Does science have a sister that encompasses the same rules and regulations and follows the same methodology or does science stand alone, with all other types of knowledge as a separate entity.
This essay will discuss differences in motives which have driven ancient and modern science, arguing that 17th century alterations of power structures led to the ultimate division between modern and ancient science and the eruption of modern science as it is today. Comparisons will be drawn regarding knowledge accessibility, prevailing philosophies and ideologies, and the relationship between science and the church.
2.Guralnik, David B. Webster’s New World Dictionary. The United States of America.World Publishing Company. 1980