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.
Simpson, J. A., and E. S. C. Weiner. The Oxford English dictionary. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1989.Print.
Berube, Margery S., et all; The American Heritage Dictionary Second Edition; Houghton Mifflin Company; Boston, Mass, 1985
The Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. Ed. J. A. Simpson and E. S. C. Weiner. 20 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1989.
Simpson, J. A., and E. S. C. Weiner. The Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon, 1989. Print.
Simpson, J.A., and E.S.C. Weiner, eds. The Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd Edition. Vol. VIII. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.
Oxford English Dictionary , The . Ed. J.A. Simpson and ESC Weiner. 2 nd Edition. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1989.
In the AOK of the natural sciences, having a skeptical approach can be quite beneficial. The natural sciences utilizes extensive methods in which they come to conclusions about the information presented, based on the various experiment...
Webster’s Desk Dictionary of the English Language. New York: Portland House. 1990. Dictionary. Page 602
Webster, Merriam. Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language. New deluxe ed. San Diego, California: Thunder Bay Press, 2001. 352, 1884. Print.
Pearsall, J. (ed) 1999, The Concise Oxford Dictionary, Oxford University Press, New York, p. 1209.
Pearsall J (1999) The Concise Oxford Dictionary Tenth Edition page 286 by Oxford University Press in Oxford New York, America
The New International Webster's Pocket Dictionary of the English Language. Naples, FL: Trident International, 2002. Print
After considering all the described points in this paper, it can be rightly said that there is a considerable difference between science and other types of knowledge.
Knowledge has a preliminary definition which is that it is justified true belief. Due to its dynamic nature, knowledge is subject to review and revision over time. Although, we may believe we have objective facts from various perceptions over time, such facts become re-interpreted in light of improved evidence, findings or technology and instigates new knowledge. This raises the questions, To what extent is knowledge provisional? and In what ways does the rise of new evidence give us a good reason to discard our old knowledge? This new knowledge can be gained in any of the different areas of knowledge, by considering the two areas of knowledge; History and Natural Sciences, I will be able to tackle these knowledge issues since they both offer more objective, yet regularly updated knowledge, which is crucial in order to explore this statement. I believe that rather than discarding knowledge we build upon it and in doing so access better knowledge, as well as getting closer to the truth.
The opinions of experts are handy in the search of knowledge; however their opinions are a double edge sword – The knowledge of experts act as building blocks to our own thoughts, but sometimes the experts may be incorrect, and their beliefs lead seekers down the wrong path. Experts often do this when new ideas are purposed. They may disprove newer ideas in order to stay relevant, like when evolution was purposed. The benefits that experts can provide in the search for knowledge can be important but often times are more a hindrance. Experts act in some ways as a neighbor shouting to you as you walk around the block but are not as fundamental emotion, sense, perception, and language in the search for knowledge. The opinions are useful when reasoning especially in regards to the History, Human Science and Natural Science Areas of Knowledge.