Theory of Knowledge Essay
Title : “Present knowledge is wholly dependent on Past knowledge.” Discuss this claim with reference to two areas of knowledge.
Word count : 1,385 words
We human beings are surrounded by a mysterious world, one which encompasses of endless levels of everything. The experience of living in the world can be expressed by artistic means, for example, and the intriguing phenomenon around us – and even with in ourselves – can be attempted to explain by science. Throughout history there have existed certain more “accepted ways” of producing knowledge and simultaneously there have been forms of art and sciences that have. Broken the accepted conventions. It is clear to see that much of our knowledge today is a culmination of many years of knowledge evolving into what it is today. In order to affirm this claim though, there is a need to ensure that there are no areas of knowledge, or no pieces of knowledge, in which present knowledge is not wholly dependent on past knowledge. Present knowledge is, by definition, is the result of past observation(s). This essay will question the claim to delve into the question if present knowledge is in fact “wholly dependent” on past knowledge and thus we would be able to also answer whether we learn from work that fits into its conventionally accepted framework or whether the works that break our preconceptions of their field are the ones that we truly draw the most knowledge from.
Past knowledge forms a base to construct upon the understanding of present knowledge.
Present knowledge is build upon past knowledge, as long as that past knowledge is somehow acquired or experienced by the “knower”. One of the fundamental purposes of human social structures is to capture knowledge and transmit it to successive generations. Still, individuals must acquire that knowledge through observations made within structures like culture, religion, and educational systems.Often a particular piece of knowledge can be transmitted without the context necessary to fully understand its significance, which diminishes the value of that knowledge). Also important to note is the semantic variability of knowledge. Some things, like abstract mathematics, are easy to transmit intact. More subjective knowledge, like personal feelings, are a lot harder. And there’s a spectrum of knowledge in between.That’s why history and arts are such vital areas of study. They work to comprehend the subtleties and full context of past knowledge so that it can be most effectively communicated and utilized in the present and future.
Personal experiences lead to different interpretations of past knowledge which hinders the production of present knowledge. As we learn we often try to enhance our knowledge, by connecting the past knowledge to our present knowledge and personal experiences from earlier in the same course or from everyday life. However, at times we overestimate our prior knowledge where in we build up present knowledge that is unclear. Moreover, Misconceptions in the prior knowledge can also lead to distortion of our present knowledge. Although present knowledge is built on prior knowledge, it is also important to realize that not all prior knowledge provides an equally solid foundation for present knowledge. In this case prior knowledge hinder learning. Ideally, people build on a foundation of robust and accurate past knowledge, forging links between previously acquired and new knowledge that help them construct increasingly complex and robust knowledge structures. The way people perceive and interpret new knowledge that builds the present knowledge is influenced by the past knowledge they have acquired using ways of knowing such as emotion, reasoning and logic. Individuals connect what they learn to what they already know, interpreting incoming information, and even sense perception, through the lens of their existing knowledge, beliefs, and assumptions. People’s current emotions, personal reasoning and current logical thinking are shaped by the past experiences they have been through. Emotions impact or in some cases totally decide the result of countless choices we are stood up to as of now. Past experience determines our interpretations of sensory stimulation and thus the actions engaged to select those sensations. To explain this I would like to introduce my Extended Essay in which I
For present knowledge to be wholly dependent on past knowledge, humans would have to be born knowing something.To this very day, science has been unable to create life from non-life; therefore, life must be a result of divine intervention. Ignoring the false dilemma, the fact that we have not found a way to create life from non-life is not evidence that there is no way to create life from non-life, nor is it evidence that we will some day be able to; it is just evidence that we do not know how to do it. Confusing ignorance with impossibility (or possibility) is fallacious. Hence we can argue that interpretation of existing knowledge is influenced by argumentum as ignorantiam through reasoning. People make wild claims, and get away with them, simply on the fact that the converse cannot otherwise be proven. Reason is used to but not not limited to make decisions, solve problems and essentially construct knowledge. When attempting to gain or expand one’s knowledge, reason as a way of knowing has its strengths; however, sometimes emotions may influence the production of present knowledge. Knowledge can therefore be the work of a single individual arrived at as a result of a number of factors including the ways of knowing.
We can also claim that falsification of past knowledge prompts construction of present knowledge. There is an epistemological optimism, inspired by the Western renaissance, leading to the faith that man has power to discern the certain knowledge. The essence of this view lies in the doctrine that ‘truth is manifest’ which implies that truth may perhaps be veiled, but it may reveal itself. If it does not reveal itself, it may be revealed by us. Arts are empirically open to criticism and one example, Chinua Achebe’s book “Things Fall Apart” uses emotive meaning and linguistic determinism as a concept to explain this claim. The central difference between linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity is the idea that world-view concepts and thoughts cannot be altered versus can be altered. The term implies that individuals that communicate in different languages have different interpretations that lead to different thought processes and can hence cause paradigm shifts in the existing worldview. Knowledge production in natural sciences also is influenced by current needs. Many falsified ideas act more as an inspiration rather than direct support of current knowledge production.
Looking into Things Fall Apart where Chinua Achebe attempts to present a complex, dynamic society to a Western audience who perceived African society as primitive, simple, and backward. It was a specifically a response to Joseph Conrad who describes the tribe as “barbaric” in his book Heart of Darkness. He strives to put forth a side of his culture that was left undiscovered. This was triggered by his emotions of anger and disappointment hence, a book that exhibits the exploration of historical representation of artistic knowledge and literature relevant to social conformity. He uses language to create a shift in paradigm, caused by different interpretations of cultural knowledge which incorporates emotional connections to the real world application of past exploration (existing knowledge) and thus prompt current development but not practically aid it. Paradigm is the primary element of scientific thought which offers a model of scientific tradition and activity. Paradigm is perspective on world, expansive quasi-metaphysical bits of knowledge or hunches about how the wonders in some space ought to be clarified. Paradigm is recognized from hypothetic o-deductive hypothesis. For, in hypothetic o-deductive hypothesis premise is fixed, and we comprehend what it is all. Despite what might be expected, it is a ‘method for seeing’, where the more we articulate the worldview, the more we realize what it is. It is a mystical model that pretty much includes mainstream researchers’ conviction about nature. The urgency felt by Chinua Achebe, which cause a shift in this worldview, is like any other current urgencies which are likely to have dramatic effects on knowledge production if not backed with valid examples.
Present knowledge is dependent on past knowledge but is influenced by other ways of knowing such as reason which may lead to falsification or enhancification of past knowledge to construct present knowledge hence, it is contentious to claim if present knowledge is “wholly dependent”. Past knowledge is far from being the entire determinant of current knowledge because while we draw inspiration from past explorations, new insights require thinking out of the box.
2019-11-25-1574702980