Introduction
According to my understanding, knowledge is completely subjective, only existing in the mind of the beholder. Not only is the acquisition of knowledge limited by the tight lenses through which we view this world, to compound this, it is also limited by the conceptions created through the individual experiences of people and how these created ethical decisions limit the acceptability of certain pursuits. In the natural sciences ethical judgments limit the methods by which knowledge can be produced to a great extent because knowledge in this area is largely paradigmatic in nature and the production often undermines those paradigms thereby conflicting with widespread views on which many conceptions are based. Art, however, is limited to a far lesser extent because I believe that Knowledge in art is completely in the eye of the beholder having an extremely limited influenced by the author. Thus, their ethics just influence the meaning they create from experiencing art in a positive or negative way.
Natural Sciences
In the natural sciences knowledge is considered objective through the collective acceptance of ‘facts’ thus creating overarching paradigms that stand as a basis for understandings of how the world works. These views greatly influence the ethical judgments that people make because they lead to a conception of how the world should be. For example, the Enlightenment in the 18th Century Europe fostered in an age favoring rationalism and the advance of knowledge through the scientific method(Princeton). To a culture that was previously based in Christianity and faith, this new way of acquiring knowledge was met with huge amounts of friction because it changed the very way that the world was viewed and that facts wer...
... middle of paper ...
...rstanding art and therefore does not prove the limitation of ethics on the means of production. Thus the only limiting factor that exists is censorship from an authoritative source.
Conclusion
Where Knowledge in the natural sciences is based heavily on the author, art contrasts this by holding the knowledge in the audience, so the productions of knowledge are varyingly influenced by ethical judgments. This is true for every way of knowing. Considering the limitations of an area of knowledge helps to assess the value of that area because the knower understands the potential of knowledge. Additionally, the origin of how knowledge in that area is formulated is considered to some degree because that must be understood in order to know what the limitations on that area. Of course, at the same time, the idea of how knowledge is created often changes from person to person.
Sor Juana’s letter Response to Sor Filotea, Aphra Behn’s short story Oronooko, and Rene Descartes’s methodology statement The Discourse on Method all touch on the consequences of knowledge. Consequences of knowledge are present in each author’s work, and their explanation fits with the certain time of their work was published. When Descartes’s The Discourse on Method was published he received criticism; stating that his methodology was close to atheism; since the things that could be doubted were infinite. Descartes method was introduced during the Enlightenment period; a time when everyone yearned for all the knowledge available. In this period knowledge equaled power, but Descartes stated that known facts can be doubts if there is uncertainty.
Have you ever wondered if there is a price to knowledge that we learn and get at any cost? In the poem “American Flamingo,” Greg Pape, (see Fig.1.) he is basing his knowledge on what he knows in the painting American Flamingo by John James Audubon, (see Fig.2.) what he did not know, and showing how smart he is with the knowledge he has. The painting has caused an ethical dilemma regarding knowledge.
Knowledge is basically the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. It consists of facts and skills acquired by a person through experience or education. Ethical considerations are relative to one’s own knowledge, experience, and value system. According to Hunt and Vitell (1986), ethical judgment is the process of considering several alternatives and choosing the most ethical alternative. For Rest (1986), ethical judgment is the process by which an individual determines that one alternative is morally right and another alternative is morally wrong. “Broadly, ethical judgement can be defined so as to include the decision process as well as the action itself.” This essay aims to discuss the way in which ethical judgements limit the methods available in the production of knowledge in both the arts and natural sciences.
Ethical judgements often add complex implications to the pursuit of knowledge, regardless of the area of knowledge. In the areas of the arts and natural sciences, ethics can pertain in diverging ways. For the arts, ethics often comes into question when determining whether or not it is worthwhile to sacrifice ethics for artistic choices and messages. For the natural sciences, in contrast, ethics is often debated in the pursuit of new knowledge. There are many different criteria to when it comes to the ethical justification of knowledge, all based on different perspectives; whether these judgements have a direct impact in knowledge production or come into play in hindsight depends largely upon how ethics is perceived.
A theory is expected to decide whether or not something is art. If one theory states that art cannot have certain qualities or must have certain qualities and we still consider it to be art, than the theory is rejected. Each of these theori...
...erefore we must seek to better understand it. It is unfortunate that the ideologies of the men mentioned here have still implemented themselves in our culture. While their premises are valid and vastly important in the history of humankind, one must be careful to discern what is relevant in today's society and what was the experimental leanings and philosophies of the past.
When reading the Berenson article, one would find a major attention to detail of critically researching documents such as paying attention to concrete scientific analysis in authenticating signatures, contracts, etc. However, something that the reader may find “missing” was the same attention to detail in artistic approaches such as form, composition, brushstrokes, and texture—the opposite of the Morelli argument. Berenson uses more scientific methodology leads to a more critical understanding and aids in validation from more than one spectrum. Berenson shows the reader that this must be found in multiple sources, and no matter how significant one document or detail maybe, it alone cannot establish authenticity. Therefore, it is important to not ignore even the smallest or seemingly pointless detail, for that may be where the proof lies.
Knowledge is rarely considered permanent, because it is constantly changing and adapting as time passes and new discoveries are made. This title roughly translates into the question: to what extent is knowledge provisional? In other words, to what extent does knowledge exist for the present, possibly to be changed in the future? At first glance, one’s mind would immediately stray to the natural sciences, and how theories are constantly being challenged, disproven, and discarded. Because of this, one might be under the impression that knowledge is always provisional because there is always room for improvement; however, there are some cases in which this is not true. There are plenty of ideas and theories that have withstood the test of time, but on the other end of the spectrum there are many that have not. This essay will evaluate the extent to which knowledge is provisional in the areas of the human sciences and history.
Production of knowledge is generally seen in a positive light. However, when ethics and morality become involved in the process of production, judgements will undoubtedly be made that may seem to limit the availability of that knowledge. Ethical judgements are made by the combination of a knower, his or her standard of value, and the situation itself. In the field of the arts and natural sciences, ethics plays a crucial role in the extent one may possibly be allowed to go to when discovering new knowledge. Reason and emotion are important ways of knowing that help guide knowers in making certain moral decisions. Both ways of knowing can be associated with teleological or deontological arguments; the ethics are based on either an objectives-focused or obligations-focused mindset. In this essay, I will be discussing the limitations set on both the arts and the natural sciences as areas of knowledge. To what extent do ethical implications hinder the way art can be produced or the methods involved in expanding society’s knowledge of science?
Ever wonder how the world would be today only if our great researchers implemented a different attitude towards their experiments? It is possible that the results would remain same. However, some argue that the consequences may be altered. Nonetheless, this does not make the earlier learned knowledge valued less or false, just supplementary. Abraham Maslow’s theory challenges nearly all ways of knowing, suggesting that if we limit our thinking, the outcomes remain homogenous, therefore, limiting the amount of knowledge we acquire. Dilemmas are mentioned in order to repudiate from the opinions that are profoundly accepted in the society. If Newton had eaten that apple, instead of using it as a tool to apply the theory of attraction, he may not have exposed gravity. Because he had more tools than a mere hammer and he was sagacious enough to expand his philosophy beyond hunger, he made such an innovation. It is widely claimed that inventions are accidental. In fact, all the chemical elements in the famous periodic table are a result of different tactics towards scientist’s research. As ToK teaches us that there is no possible end to a situation for it is influenced by the perceptive skills of the arguers. There is never a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ or the ‘ultimate answer’ in the conflict, but the eminence of rationalization is what poises the deliberation. This suggestion explains that there is always that one more way to approach the conclusion. Thus, pursuit of knowledge habitually requires dissimilar ways of knowing for it lengthens the verdict.
...ofeminism, I cannot help but believe that the ethics of valuing women, people, and the nonhuman world, asserting an expansive conception of knowledge that embraces science equally with the knowledge that emerges from understanding, emotion, and creativity is very needed here and now.
Ethics is the study of moral values and the principles we use to evaluate actions. Ethical concerns can sometimes stand as a barrier to the development of the arts and the natural sciences. They hinder the process of scientific research and the production of art, preventing us from arriving at knowledge. This raises the knowledge issues of: To what extent do moral values confine the production of knowledge in the arts, and to what extent are the ways of achieving scientific development limited due to ethical concerns? The two main ways of knowing used to produce ethical judgements are reason, the power of the mind to form judgements logically , and emotion, our instinctive feelings . I will explore their applications in various ethical controversies in science and arts as well as the implications of morals in these two areas 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.
To the great extend ethical judgements limit the methods available in the production of knowledge in both the arts and the natural sciences. But in my opinion such a limitations are essential, while people need to be to some extend controlled. The boundaries are needed because giving to people to much freedom and power is very dangerous. The only one problem in case of ethical judgements is that the perception about something wrong or right differs among the people. I think that this comes from the inside, generally there are some “informal laws” how to behave, what is good and bad, but this is a personal matter of every single person which ones from that “laws” he or she accept and reject. The morality is determined by culture and experiences and differs among people. If there would not be something like moral code the production of knowledge in art the same as in natural science would not have any limitations. Using examples from art and biology I will try to show how ethical judgements limit the methods available in the production of knowledge in both the arts and the natural sciences, but also I will try to explain my statement that such a limitations are necessary.
It can create a bias in the evaluation of art, but can also add meaning. In the first instance, a picture drawn by a child of her family, scribbled with crayons on construction paper, would not be called fine art objectively. However, the child’s mother knows the intention of the girl, is aware of the home environment, and can gain enjoyment, if not from the art then from the mindset of the girl who produced the art. Personal background with art relates to John Dewey’s explanation of how art ought to be understood. In his discussion of Art as Experience, Dewey maintains that “to grasp the sources of esthetic experience it is . . . necessary to have recourse to animal life” (10). At a physical level, it is important to understand the environment, surroundings, and motivations in order to fully understand the meaning of a work. Even though the physical art is not a masterpiece, the affection and visualization of family which motivates the creation is understood by the parent, and imbues the work with meaning. It is personal understanding that guides an understanding of what is art on a personal level. Whether one knows the story behind the work or attempt to infer the meaning, the story behind the work is a large part of how an individual designates art that is pleasing. Aristotle understood the potential for art to be cathartic, which is another facet of a