It is a natural instinct for humans to know and accumulate knowledge. Engaging in both literature and natural science subjects in IB, I have brought different aspects of knowledge to my life. At a glance, we tend to believe in scientific journals more than fictional literatures because we can prominently see facts organised into schematic structure. Natural science uses reason, evidence and strong logic to support the theory. Due to its consistency, scientific knowledge is often disagreed. On the other hand, inconsistencies and independence in art make it to be an area of knowledge with controversies in interpretations. However, we do not disregard the values of art. There are people learning Shakespeare’s poems that do not seem to convey what we know as facts. Scottish philosopher Thomas Carlyle insists: “Indian Empire, or no Indian Empire we cannot do without Shakespeare!” If we only consider the facts that can be seen, Indian Empire seems more promising. But why do we still value Shakespeare highly? Through this essay, I want to explore what aspects of ‘systematic organisation’ support the creation of knowledge and how ‘facts’ attribute as well.
Natural science is a structured, reasoned, and organised field of knowledge. Through schematic processes, scientific theories are proposed. Scientists impose self-censorship to support the studied ideas. By observation of the natural phenomena, scientists come up with a question. The question is reformulated into a hypothesis that is ‘falsifiable’. Falsifiability opens to a possibility of controversies to the hypothesis. For example, if a scientist question: “Does God exist?” then this question never is a hypothesis because it is an idea that can never be disproven. After selecting a ...
... middle of paper ...
...ries is where something beyond facts is needed. “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing,” said by Socrates summarises what we need to understand about the nature of knowledge. The openness of knowledge is compensated by imaginations and ideas that ponder to something new. The more we know, the more we realise there are more to be discovered. Ironically, knowing that we know nothing stimulates advancement.
The potential and depth of knowledge is more than what we can fathom. Systematic organisation of facts gives good grasp of what knowledge is. Good reasoning and logic upholds representation of the knowledge in the areas of knowledge. Nonetheless, one must acknowledge that understandings of knowledge can go beyond that. Knowledge can derive from what seems to be disorganised and personal. Interpretations and imaginations can hold meanings in knowing.
How we approach the question of knowledge is pivotal. If the definition of knowledge is a necessary truth, then we should aim for a real definition for theoretical and practical knowledge. Methodology examines the purpose for the definition and how we arrived to it. The reader is now aware of the various ways to dissect what knowledge is. This entails the possibility of knowledge being a set of truths; from which it follows that one cannot possibly give a single definition. The definition given must therefore satisfy certain desiderata , while being strong enough to demonstrate clarity without losing the reader. If we base our definition on every counter-example that disproves our original definition then it becomes ad hoc. This is the case for our current defini...
Messenger, E., Gooch, J., & Seyler, D. U. (2011). Arguing About Science. Argument! (pp. 396-398). New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill Co..
In conclusion, investigating Chalmers core ideas, falsificationism was found to be far superior to induction. First, scientific knowledge is not proven knowledge. Second, science is not objective. Investigations into the place of speculative imaginings in science found that both Chalmers and Popper were conditionally correct. Investigating the question of whether science was objective or subjective found that due to limitations of observations by human kind, science is at best, subjective.
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...
“Knowledge is nothing more than the systematic organization of facts”. Discuss this statement in relation to two areas of knowledge.
The Hypothetico-Deductive model is considered by some to be the hallmark of scientific research methods. The model is predicated on obtaining information in an effort to confirm or reject the hypothesis developed. This methodology requires the researcher to ask questions, hone in on the issue through preliminary research, formulate hypothesis and measurements, test, draw conclusions, refine and report. In order for the model to be effective the question being addressed by the researcher must be testable. This means there is practical feasibility of producing counterexamples. For example answering the question of “does God exist?” would not facilitate an appropriate use of the Hypothetico-Deductive model since there is no scientific way to test for it.
Knowledge truly is a power that can be used to help you or used against you. It can help you be in control or be controlled. For this reason, freedom of press and speech are constantly being fought for in many civil wars. Without knowledge, a person is subjected to the control of a person with greater knowledge.
Demarcation between science and non-science or pseudo science is particularly important in scientific education, as it determines, for almost every member of our society, what they will accept as true regarding science, particularly creationism and evolution. Having public ...
... put together individual obtains knowledge gracefully through everyday conversations, actions, and thoughts. Socrates once said, “True knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing”. I disagree with this quote and statement. I believe that being aware of the fact that you know little is nothing to be humiliated of. This marks the beginning of a learning experience. Being aware of knowledge and its importance is certainly a necessity. Knowledge can never be taken away from an individual. Once thoughts, and new ideas and values develop into an individual’s mind it cannot be snatched. The way you view the world is your own deep perception. The more you learn about the world the more insight you have. These are building blocks to learning new things. Soon enough, you will realize that the continuous quest of knowledge is one of the pillars of your victory and bliss.
"Knowledge, Truth, and Meaning." Cover: Human Knowledge: Foundations and Limits. Web. 17 Feb. 2011. .
Philosophy has guided great thinkers towards obtaining a radical grasp on the world. Masterminds like these are born, grow up, and die; yet, their theories tend to impact humanity’s perception of the world. We call them philosophers, although geniuses such as Plato and Aristotle are the leading examples of understanding simple, but uncovered questions that make up our character. For example, what is life? This is a popular question that people have asked themselves from the moment reason kicks in. What is eudaimonia? A question with a valid response answered by the Aristotelian thought into Christianity; which is said to be achieved though the virtuous life. But in fact, these questions can’t compare with the theory of knowledge that’s perceived from multiple points of views by the Pre-Socratics. Epistemology is a word philosophers use to define knowledge. Nevertheless, Plato and Aristotle’s theory of knowledge led our generation to visualize and interpret ourselves in a defined way. Their two different views in knowledge share a common idea, which is that knowledge must be based on a systematic method. Without their guidance, our ability to grasp our doubts would become untenable. I will present their theories of knowledge by comparing and contrasting Plato and Aristotle’s theory of knowledge. They both had many differences, but they came together on simple things. Their vibrant thinking in the world unraveled mysteries that come together to this day.
The aforementioned question incorporates a clear sense of direction and purpose, laying out the fundamentals of the Theory Of Knowledge by visibly stating the Areas of Knowledge that are supposed to be further delved into; in this case ethics, arts and natural sciences. The topic aims to denote that ethics are directly correlated to arts and natural sciences, the three being interdependent on each other and influencing one another in some way or the other.
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?
knowledge clear. My definition of knowledge is facts or opinions which are generated through the help of the ways of knowing and the process itself, and I narrow personal life down to mean social, physical, and emotional wellbeing outside of profession. The combination of the two is personal experience. Explicitly defined, ‘purpose’ is an objective or goal, and ‘meaning’ is the passion or driving force behind it, as well as the significance towards persons. The arts and the sciences are to be the areas of knowledge of my choice, however, my focus will be on the knowledge processes applied in each. The question raised is, therefore, to what extent do ways of knowing affect personal lives in such a way that areas of knowledge are also affected
Imagination, also known as the faculty of imagining, is the act of forming new ideas or images and concepts that are not present to our senses. Imagined images can only be seen in the “mind’s eye” (Blakslee, 1993)however, attempts at revealing imaginations can sometimes be made through narratives and works of art in a bid to share with other independent minds. Knowledge on the other hand is the facts, information and skills acquired by person through experience or education. Since knowledge is mainly facts and information it can be shared and mutually understood by a society. Knowledge is easier to comprehend as compared to other people’s imaginations where one’s own mind might drive them to a different comprehension while trying to understand other people’s imaginations.