783 Words4 Pages
To what extent is truth different in mathematics, the arts and ethics?
According to the tripartite theory, the second condition for knowledge is truth. If one knows a thing then it must be true. If knowledge that is accepted previously but has been proven wrong over the years with new information and evidence, then the knowledge is considered false and is not considered as knowledge. If this is the case, then how exactly would you define truth? There are a few theories regarding truth and is sometimes called as the truth tests. The first one is called the correspondence theory of truth. According to this theory, truth is what is perceived through our senses. The second one being the coherence theory of truth in which truth relies on what is already known to us. The last one is the pragmatic theory of truth in which truth is whatever that brings us benefit and useful to us. In different areas of knowledge, we can say that the truth is different from looking at how much benefits it brings to us. Hence, how can you measure ‘how much benefits’ of these areas of knowledge? And how is the benefits in different areas of knowledge different?
Mathematics is considered as the absolute truth since it is based on axioms. Axioms are rules or statements that are accepted as true. We can say that mathematics is beneficial to us since it is applied in a lot of real life situations that makes it easier for us to live our daily life such as figuring out the size of an area so you can tile floors, in cooking where you need to figure out how much ingredient to put in the dish and calculating your money so you can make better financial decisions. So, we can say that mathematical knowledge is true in a way that it brings us benefit. However, in some c...

... middle of paper ...

...e are able to differentiate what is right and wrong in different cultures so that we may be able to adapt better in foreign countries without offending other people. However, what if applying ethics becomes disadvantageous to us? What if ethics limits our production of knowledge? For example, the knowledge of cloning would enable us to produce a lot of offspring in a shorter time but to some people cloning is considered taboo especially the possibility of human cloning since to some people it is not natural and against their religion. So, if ethical judgement does not brings us benefit, can we say that it is true?
As a conclusion, we can say that the truth in these areas of knowledge is different as the benefits that different areas of knowledge bring are different. And we can conclude that not all the knowledge in these areas of knowledge is beneficial to us.
Open Document