Theory of Knowledge Essay
“That which is accepted as knowledge today is sometimes discarded tomorrow.” Consider knowledge issues raised by this statement in one area of knowledge.
Dana Lee 11B
International School of Stuttgart
World Count : 1453
What we believe to be true is not consistent. The Earth is round, Pluto’s not a planet anymore, we no longer believe that the thunder is God’s punishment, but we have scientifically discovered that it is merely a natural phenomenon. Over the generations, humans have improved the way we view and interpret the world around us. Especially, the scientists and historians have been improving their methods, even at this very moment. By using the newly-found scientific technology and revising history, humans have been able to update the knowledge base and discard what is false. Then, to what extent can knowledge change over time and does the nature of knowledge influence its change? Each Area of Knowledges such as history and math may change over time differently, since the definition of knowledge slightly differs in each of the AoKs. To explore whether the knowledge which is accepted today is discarded tomorrow, it would be necessary to define what ‘knowledge’ refers to in the context of each AoK.
Like everything else, knowledge is affected by time. The status of truth as knowledge may increase over time, or gradually be discarded. The definition of history as AoK is ‘the study of past events, not the past itself, but our interaction with it.’ (theoryofknowledge.net) Hence, history is not only constantly being reviewed and updated but also depends on the historian’s perspective to certain extent. In contrast, mathematics is defined as the field of study where it is built on ‘absolute objectivity’. (theoryofknowledge.net)
Carl Becker, the president of the American Historian Association, defined history as the study field that is open to interpretation and not “a set of immutable truths”(Becker, 1931). By means of new accounts on the past events or declassified documents, new historical facts may come to light. Accordingly, our understanding of a certain event may be revised, on account of new evidence, discoveries, technology or social trends. For instance, a drastic change in scientific knowledge can result in change of ethical perspective, which can affect the interpretation of the past events. Hence, any historically racist, sexist, homophobic or anti-semitic bigotry that was known as common belief can be modified.
A most notable example would be re-interpretation of Nazis’ policy based on ‘superiority of German(Aryan) race’ and ‘anti-semitism’, which are built on the basis of scientific theory ‘Social darwinism’. In this case, disposal of knowledge in human sciences, led to change of knowledge in the the other AoK, history. Charles Darwin(1809-82), a British naturalist who studied evolution, developed a theory that in nature animals become stronger and more adapted to their environment over centuries as the weaker species or individuals die out, and eventually, features that are necessary for survival are past down. In 19th centuries, the Social Darwinists distorted this theory of ‘the survival of the fittest’ which originated from natural sciences, in order to justify the human actions. ‘Social Darwinism’ is a theory that just like the animal species, the superior human races will be more likely to survive and pass on these certain traits that enabled them to better survive to their offsprings. Hence, such traits will increase in number, while the ‘weaker’ individuals will eventually die off. It is claimed that one of Hitler and Nazi party’s main goals was to apply this accepted ‘science’ to society. Early 20th century influential German biologists and few leading Nazis revealed in their reports that this Social Darwinist theory had a major impact upon Nazi policy on racial discrimination such as anti-semitism or pan-German. Jews was referred as ‘pest and cholera’ and a ‘poison’ polluting the purity of the Volk(German national community)(Lengbehn).
Generally, the scientists acquire knowledge in human sciences by using sense perception to observe his natural surroundings, then use creativity and imagination to question how a certain phenomenon occurred. Then, the scientists aim to find an answer to the question through inductive and deductive logical reasoning, by setting up a hypothesis and finding the evidence to support. However, the idea of racial superiority that is embedded in Social Darwinism theory, is based on the prejudiced observation attempted to apply scientific justification to social inequalities, especially in western societies. In the late 19th century, the ideas of racial superiority were largely accepted. For instance, in 1970, when Charles Darwin dared to question ‘scientific racism’ on the basis of his re-examination of the alleged ‘craniological’ evidence for it, he was attacked on all sides by both scientists and non-scientists.
That is, since Social Darwinism theory was created upon the ‘prejudiced’ observation aimed for political agenda instead of using the sense perception in order to follow the logical reasoning procedure, it should be discredited. After the WWII was over in 1945, the world has recognized the disastrous effect and attempted to denounce the myth of racial superiority. Since then, the new research has been conducted to prove that such ‘biological fact’ which used to back up the social myth of racial superiority is no longer considered to exist. The evidence was found in human evolutionary genetics showing that human genetic differences are nearly gradual. The change in ethical belief that ‘all people are equal’, which now dominates Western ideology, has linked to scientific paradigm shift. Essentially, people tend to perceive what the general society view as reality as the truth; that is, the knowledge claims that are generally accepted as truth are those accepted by affiliated society or community. Hence, as the society began to recognize the falsification in the reasoning in scientific racism that the theory of social darwinism was based on, the theory was no longer accepted.
Darwin’s theory, modified by Haeckel, Chamberlain and others, clearly contributed to the death of over six million Jews and four million others who were judged as ‘inferior races’. Furthermore, the primary reason why Nazism could reach to the extent of the holocaust was due to the widespread acceptance of Social Darwinism by the scientific and academic community at the time. It proves that it is crucial for humanity to continue questioning the existing knowledge for improved truth, even if this means the discrediting of long-accepted ideas. New evidence may ultimately contradict alleged truths, such as that the kings have a divine right to the throne or men are superior to women.
On the other hand, mathematics is an area of knowledge were ‘reason’ plays an integral part. The fact that mathematical theorem must be supported by a reasonable mathematical proof shows that the field of mathematics provides definite, clear answers. When we are in a math class and are given a problem to solve, we often feel a profound sense of accomplishment. We knew that there were no other ways to solve the problem, that there was only one answer and we were able to find it. According to platonic view, mathematics exists in the realm of ideas that is ‘eternal and unchanging’.(Plato) Certainly, this appears to be our first impression of maths. It does seem that 1+1=2 will always be the truth. Also, the unchanging nature of maths can be evidenced by the fact that same mathematical rules found in ancient civilizations, such as the sexagesimal system of the Babylonians is still used in our time keeping (60 seconds to a minute, 60 minutes to an hour). These systems have not been discarded and have been used for thousands of years, to this day.
However, even mathematics is founded upon assumptions based on our relative perspective. For example, mathematical statements are created based on ‘axioms’ or ‘postulates’, which means that the statement is made upon the assumptions. The fact that such assumptions establish the foundation of mathematics lead us to question whether in fact the field of mathematics is the most objective area of knowledge. Our perception of truth may change, whether this is based on new findings or new knowledge claims. Hence, a change in our perception or belief can have a significant influence on the knowledge in mathematics as well.
In conclusion, knowledge can change over time in relation to the nature of the area of knowledge. When the AoK such as history is heavily reliant on the perspectives or the interpretations, the knowledge is more likely to change over time. On the other hand, knowledge of relatively objective subjects such as mathematics tends to remain constant. However, in both cases, even though the extent of change differs depending on the Areas of Knowledges, in both cases the knowledge can change on account of new evidences coming to light.