What Classifies as Common Knowledge in Science and History

Knowledge goes beyond the regurgitation or memorization of facts, and knowledge claims can either be justified with experience or simply an understanding. Different areas of knowledge have different methods to either build or falsify knowledge, as the method of justification differs between these areas of knowledge. There are perspectives to support building facts around knowledge, while disagreeing with the neglect of facts that were previously held as knowledge. These perspectives collectively create opposition for the areas of knowledge, science and history. Both science and history are subject to changes in knowledge for facts may sometimes be discarded, built upon, or distorted to prove an opinion or theory. This does not necessarily mean that knowledge is always discarded and forgotten, but simply acknowledges that these areas of knowledge continue to build on the previous facts or opinions. Since both areas approach knowledge though different perspectives, the question that emerges is to what extent is society justified in establishing or discarding that which is defined as common knowledge.

Beginning with the natural sciences, knowledge is derived though objective means using the scientific method to inquire about the world. The scientific method deals with experimentation, and repetition of these experiments to ensure consistency before accumulating data. This data is then evaluated in order to create the basis for facts that will be assimilated to generate scientific knowledge. This knowledge is always subject to criticism and under certain circumstances can be disproved with new theories. These new theories either replace the previously existing theories, or coexist with the old theories. In order for a scientific t...

... middle of paper ...

...ith the correct knowledge. Although religion and science have different approaches to answering the question why, it is debatable whether one provides any benefits over the other. The deciding factor on whether religion or science is better is completely dependent on an individual’s perception.

Overall, history and the natural sciences have contrasting methods in building or falsifying knowledge, because of their drastically different ways of knowing. Yet, both areas of knowledge develop previously regarded knowledge, which may sometimes be discarded, built upon, or distorted to prove an opinion or theory. Attaining knowledge in different areas may differ, but all types of knowledge are to be respected as they all provide their merits. Knowledge claims can either be justified with experience or simply an understanding, but the best knowledge is a product of both.