Press "Enter" to skip to content

The quality of knowledge

The quality of anything in life is subject to a range of measures. Humans are not often seen as individualistic beings. We tend to follow the crowd. Therefore, wide acceptance of something’s value can be indicative of its strength or worth, but it does not need be the only indicator. One also has to place context in the evaluation equation because value shifts with context, and it can be the case that what is ignored or demeaned by a large group of people can be of enormous worth to a much smaller one.

The quality of anything in life is subject to a range of measures. Humans are not often seen as individualistic beings. We tend to follow the crowd. Therefore, wide acceptance of something’s value can be indicative of its strength or worth, but it need not be the only indicator. There are though many other ways of evaluating the value of knowledge, all of them having merit and offering differing challenges to the notion that wide ‘acceptance’ is the ‘best’ way of discerning it.

One also has to place context in the evaluation equation because value shifts with context, and it can be the case that what is ignored or demeaned by a large group of people can be of enormous worth to a much smaller one.

To claim that one knows

In order to address the set title, it is crucial to explore the quality of knowledge by considering the ways of knowing such as the natural sciences and the human sciences

As children, we grow up being taught a preconceived notion. What our parents believe and their parents before that without any real evidence. We accept their knowledge and even opinions as the truth because this is all you have grown to learn. When the child is older, they will accept the knowledge of the power above them whether this may be their parents, teacher or professors. A child will believe their parent due to their love and devotion to them, they are part of their ingroup.

Other essay:   Zero knowledge proof

Social identity theory was proposed by the psychologist Tajfel and is based on the cognitive process of social categorization. Which classifies people into groups based on similar characteristics. This allows for the idea of ingroups and outgroups to emerge.

In this day and age we all use electronics. Phones, tablets and laptops. But excatly how many people can say they understand how

We tend to

But are these so called “facts” true?

An explanation is defined as a “statement or account to make something clear”, it is a clarification and simplification of a situation or idea. People often say “I am looking for truth.” to fulfil some sort of void, to make us or others happy ( like the story of santa clause) maybe or perhaps they are just bored. Humans tend to look for some kind of “truth” to understand the world around them whether this may be spiritually or scientifically. But in reality, we just want a simple explanation for whatever dilemma or issue we may be going through. Good explanations may be worth looking at in a religious sense. Take for example the explanation of the creation of the world through narratives in religious texts. It is easier and it makes sense. It gives people a sense of purpose. That they are in this world for a reason. That there is a higher power for all humans, exactly like it is in the real world. However with religion one must have faith. Because religion is good until the pragmatic side of you thinks about it too intensely about it.The where? The what? The who? So although it may be more complicated and not necessarily understood fully, another explanation such as the bigbang theory may be viewed as more plausible, because we believe these scientists who claim they have proof, nevertheless this view on the world may lead to an existential crisis, because unlike religion this gives no explanation as to why you are here. Religion is one of the reasons that it could argued that there is no quality to knowledge. It is either an absolute truth or falsehood. Its about

Other essay:   Distinction between practical and theoretical knowledge

When growing up children are

In history people generally have believed what the majority of other people believe assuming the information is credible because, well, everyone agreed too. Humans don’t like being alone in things it is easier to be accepted if you are like everyone else. However once upon a time people believed that the earth was flat this is what they accepted as the truth. If someone disagreed and said the

Knowledge are the skills and information we obtain from our own experience are h

Knowledge is not a quality.

One persons truth may be very different from another persons truth.

But how did we acquire this knowledge

The purpose of knowledge

Explain the value of knowledge

Humans are not often seen as individualistic beings. We tend to follow the crowd We tend to want validation or a second opinion

Certain scientific facts, such as the earth is spherical is accepted by the majority, people trust science because they wouldn’t have any other way of obtaining or proving the theory or concept. However knowledge can sometimes be established through an individual’s opinion and not through count ballots. Religion Is the perfect example of people accepting their opinion as the truth. People see their religion the one and only original truth and religion. Religion is a concept that is affected by

It may not be true to everyone else but it is accepted as so

Think about that video – it has lots of examples of what goes wrong when the scientific method goes awry. Bad science produces bad or faulty knowledge – the problem is that sizeable groups of people accept it because it suits what they want to do anyway. Similarly flawed logic is behind flat earth theory, vaccination refusal for children and climate change denial. So, how would you use that?

Other essay:   Knowledge management case study

Broad acceptance, by a significant majority of thinkers, of rules and theorems is at the heart of the natural sciences. A scientific theory is a clarification of an aspect of the natural world that can be tested and substantiated by the scientific method.

It seems absurd to us nowadays that people believed the earth was flat, just as absurd to people in the future after they realise the earth is in fact triangular, and not spherical as we believe. This is simply because this is what they have accepted as their truth

And exactly like mentioned earlier knowledge was acquired through the scientific method. The ancient civilization, before the time of the Greek philosophers who referred to the earth as spherical. Their method was just what they saw with their bare eye, and of course their legends and myths about sailors who set sail and went so far they fell off the edge of the world which they believed. Around this time however there were people who suggested otherwise through observation and not folklore and myth. Aristotle, the Greek philosopher, noticed the shadow of theearth on the moon when the unar eclipse happened hence contributing to some of the first documentation that the earth is spherical. The greek geographer Strabo advanced the theory when he observed that if you see a ship sail off it would not fade off into the distance, it would, as a matter of fact appear to be slowly sinking downward on the horizon, suggesting this was because the earth was curved and when sailing one would not simply be moving further away but also curving around the planet.

Psycholgy is defined as “the scientific study of behaviour and mental processes”

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

0 Shares
Share via
Copy link

Spelling error report

The following text will be sent to our editors: