Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of Knowledge in our life
The importance of knowledge
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the 21st century, where new information for knowledge is being created faster than can be absorbed the discarding of information is questioned. Discarded, however, is a very direct term. The terms means to throw away because it is useless or unwanted (Discard). Although people seem to be “throwing away” the information that they base their knowledge on, they are only improving it. It is key to continue to grow as a species and advance the information people obtain and understand. For this reason, the improvement to knowledge allows humans a clearer understanding of themselves.
This statement is of value in the natural sciences.
The natural science is an area of knowledge that has seen many changes in knowledge in a short amount of time,
…show more content…
In the natural sciences, information is changed because there is new and relevant information that trumps the old. Yet in history, the area of revisionist history holds less prestige. Just as the natural sciences goal is to learn more about humans, so does revisionist history. It is a historian’s job to discover the fallacies and incontinences in our history and make the edits to provide accurate knowledge (Zinn). In this way, information that is regarded as true one day can quickly change the next. For example the saying “Columbus sailed the blue in 1492” is a phrase that is sung by many American school children even today. The celebration on October 10th to commend the courageous and heroic Christopher Columbus has been halted in the United States. This is because the once romanticized version of Columbus achievements has been suppressed by the revisions revisionist historians have made. Columbus has now been associated as the a man of great brutality against the Native Indians of the area, the initiator of massacres, and a person driven by his desire for personal success (Zinn). There are even theories that suggest that Columbus was not the first man to discover the Americas (Zinn). The information above is discomforting to hear for many. That is because emotion is greatly tied to changes made in history, especially. Unlike the natural sciences where advancements and clarifications are openly accepted, changes to information connect to different emotions in this area of knowledge. History, which is the study of the past, is very valuable for society. From a young age, people learn to value history and base a large deal of our knowledge on it. As a society, people are emotionally connected
Not only have we had useless irrelevant information instilled onto us by the government, but it has dehumanized us as well. We plan to help instil knowledge back into the general population, to make us ////”
We as humans tend to have an unquenchable thirst for knowledge. We look for knowledge about everybody and everything that surrounds us in our day-to-day life. Sadly though, we must accept that in the grand scheme of life we (as a society) tend to put pleasure above our quest for knowledge. The pursuit of knowledge tends to take time and energy, two things we call invaluable, and it also shows us things that might depress us. Contrastingly, ignorance takes no time and energy.
Our knowledge is a key to our success and happiness in our life to give us personal satisfaction. Knowledge is power but not always. Sometimes our self-awareness and growth as an individual gives us negative thoughts that make us want to go back to undo it. Everyone wants to unlearn a part in our life that brought us pain and problems. Good or bad experiences brought by true wisdom can be used for our self-acceptance, self-fulfillment and these experiences would make us stronger as we walk to the road of our so called “life”, but Douglas’s and my experience about knowledge confirmed his belief that “Knowledge is a curse”. Both of us felt frustrated and sad from learning knowledge.
...how a newfound capacity to know more than they understand, suggesting the success of humans as a species may rely on never reaching (or never reaching for) a full understanding. Perhaps we should be accepting simply knowing as principle.
In “The principles of human knowledge” George Berkeley responds to the skeptics view about the external world. As we already talked about, skepticism is against the belief that you can know anything because even saying that you “know” something is a big contradiction itsel...
The people of ancient civilization were curious about the study of stem cells. Hindus from the thirteen and fourteen centuries BC knew that the result of the fetus would come from mixing two seeds of the parents (Kelly 16). They weren't the only people who wondered about the studies of stem cells. Greek philosopher named Aristotle was also interested in the study of stem cells so he discovered two very important theories. The two theories were Perfomation and Epigenesis (Kelly 16). According to the theory of Peromation, the fetus grows over time (Kelly 16). In contrast, Epigenesis means tat the fetus begins as a generic mass and then different parts are added to the fetus (Kelly 16).
Knowledge is something that can change day to day, which can be learned through both the natural and human sciences. Knowledge changes in the natural sciences when an experiment is conducted and more data has been gathered. Knowledge changes in human sciences when patterns are recognized in society and further tests have been conducted. Does our knowledge of things in the natural and human sciences change every day? I think that our knowledge grows everyday but does not necessarily change every day. The areas of knowledge that will be discussed in this essay are natural and human sciences. In History we can see that at one point something that was considered knowledge then transformed into different knowledge, especially in the natural sciences. However, in the past, due to lack of technology, it might have been more of a lack of knowledge that then turned into knowledge on the topic.
...feasibility' and 'Causal' theories, and knowledge as 'warranted true belief' require us to take a certain 'leap of faith' when considering the question of knowledge at times. In order to avoid scepticism, I hold that knowledge does not necessarily need to be infallible, but rather probable. This does not mean that a proposition does not need to be true, it means that something we hold as knowledge is not one which is beyond reasonable doubt, but one which it wouldn't make sense to doubt. Yes, we have an obligation to avoid doxastic errors by reflecting on our belief-forming processes and by adjusting them in pursuit of reliability, but we also need to make a reasonable link between reality and truth to the extent that a proposition becomes senseless to doubt. So, although Gettier problems may be inescapable, this does not mean we are starved of knowledge completely.
...eas of knowledge has already been tainted with bias and selection as stated above. There is merely a slight chance of the knowledge not having any hints of bias and selection. In spite of this, of course, knowledge can still be objective and impartial in nature, which is good since the people will be provided with complete accounts and information. Nonetheless, the sheer amount of knowledge may render it useless, as well as clouding the truth. Whereas, knowledge with hints of bias and selection may be subjective and representative, but, on a brighter note, the knowledge may be more specific and better evaluated. Better evaluated in the sense that a debate between different people under the influence of bias and selection can contribute to the growth of knowledge. That is why, at the end of the day, knowledge with hints of bias and selection is still worth knowing.
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.
When I think about knowledge the first thing that comes to my mind is education. I believe that knowledge comes to people by their experiences in life. In other words, life is an instrument that leads me to gain knowledge. Many people consider that old people are wise because they have learned from good and bad experiences throughout their lives. Education requires work, dedication and faith to gain knowledge. We acquired knowledge through the guidance of from parents, role models, college/University teachers and life experiences.
Amidst many similarities, the rift between ancient and modern science is enormous and has frequently left historians puzzled. Although it is clear to historians that the stagnant science of ancient times developed into the modern scientific pursuit in the 17th century, it is not clear what specifically caused this revolution of scientific thought.
The overall essence of education or knowledge acquisition is reflected in an axiom by Confucius which says “Tell me, and I will forget; show me, and I will remember; but involve me, and I will understand. Back then, it was clear that learning was a comprehensive process which involves passionate exchanges between students and their teachers; unfortunately this is not the case in most modern classrooms. Instead of the expected bidirectional communication between learners and teachers, in the modern learning environment there is a unidirectional system which involves the teacher incessantly hurling facts at students who, due to their passive roles as mere receptacles, have fallen asleep or; in the case of “best” students are mindlessly taking notes. This leads to a situation where knowledge has neither been conferred nor acquired.
Technology has advanced to the point where it touches our lives in nearly every conceivable way-we no longer have to lift a finger to perform the most trivial tasks. The wealth of information and science we have learned in the last few centuries have made our lives easier but not always better, especially when concerning civilization as a whole. Ibsen, Freud, and Vonnegut argue that human values have not kept pace with knowledge's unceasing expansion, which has become an anathema for the individual person and deleterious to society's delectation, albeit without people's entire comprehension.
The reader, like modern man, must not give into “the arrogant presumption of certitude or the debilitating despair of skepticism,” but instead must “live in uncertainty, poised, by the conditions of our humanity and of the world in which we live, between certitude and skepticism, between presumption and despair “(Collins 36).