Reflection on the Concept of Knowledge

Reflection on the Concept of intimacyThat which is sure as friendship today is some successions discarded tomorrow. Consider cognition issues raised by this statement in two areas of friendship.Satyajith BotchaPlato once said, Knowledge is a justified, true be lyingf. 1Its non just systematic system of facts, but what an individual deems true and invests faith in. When we talk about noesis being discarded, does it mean that its nullified and not further employ? Or, does it mean that its temporarily ignored overdue to differing opinions? In my opinion, knowledge can be debunked as in, discarded or temporarily do on hold, much like theories. As the statement is further searchd, some early(a) questions arises as to who charters knowledge or who discards, it? I believe, knowledge should evermore be backed by legitimate evidence.In my study, I trust to explore the multiple perspectives the various possibilities, ideas, and the holistic view on which our world ought to be explored, in order to check what knowledge truly is and its significance on our lives. One begins to question the usefulness of knowledge if it would dismantletually be induce ancient anyways? If knowledge can assortment so easily, do we necessitate the serious to question the asperity of the current theorems if they would nevertheless have a fleeting existence?I believe that eventually it is up to the individual to expect knowledge as it is today. However, if mavin wants to question it, they have the right to do so because, if no one questioned information newer information would never gain into existence and the world would never progress. This does not mean that in our progress toward the future we can forget the past. In the neo world, two wide known areas of knowledge which have numerous practical applications, the natural sciences and recital have undergone drastic changes revolutionizing each field. To further my study I go forth be using three different ways o f knowing reason, reek perception and emotion.History as we know is a record of our spotless past experiences, information and ideas. It shows us the way the world was, or what we horizon was in the previous generations. We can clearly see by a panorama of perception, the radical change in knowledge, evident in modern humans different way of thinking than from that of their ancestors. On the other hand, the natural sciences, we see sweeping changes all over the globe occurring even as we speak. We are given new things to see, to explore and to question due to the rapid development in technology and scientific question. But, how legitimate is this? Is it assertable that some of the material we know today is perhaps less tender than that of the outdated discoveries, or information that our ancestors perceived as the right ones? If so, how do we bank on what is right and what is molest, or how do we predict what could change and what could not?A theory that has long been discar ded is that of spontaneous generation2. This express that human beings originated from inanimate lifeless substances, such as rocks. Our ancestors developed this through viewing the growth of maggots from rotting meat. Although this concept seems ridiculous now, we must actualize that this theory was believed by most of the 19th century scientists. In fact, it was considered as a scientific fact. However, the theory of falsification3 that basically tells us that there is an constitutive(a) possibility that a hypothesis or theory can be false is an example of the instability of knowledge. This is where those who believe in wide-range perception come in. This is where perception kicks in as a key element to choice and to understanding knowledge. Spontaneous generation was countered by Luis Pasteur in 1859, putting it to test4. He had placed two pieces of meat in separate jars, one undecided and the other closed. He observed maggots only growing in the one that was opened. Thus, h e concluded that the origins of the maggots must be from outside, living organisms in the air. In truth it was flies that had laid their eggs in the meat to prolong their young. In an instant our view of the world and the perspective of the origins of life were debunked. until now people began to believe just as completely in a whole new theory proposed by Pasteur5. On this basis, at this rate, if a major portion of an entire generation would believe in the homogeneous fact for years without doubt, then where does the fate of human kind lie?.I believe that I can chance on the right information using both intuition and reasoning. For example, when you look at all the historians that worked onerous to define knowledge through their works or investigations, you see flaws in the knowledge that we had blindly believed for generations. The internet eras historic event, The design Trade Centre 9/11 attack, was claimed by conspiracy theorists to have collapsed in 9 seconds inciting p robable links to the centre being cheat with explosives prior to the attack6. This theory was supported by Rosie ODonnell who stated that investigation was must. If this wasnt ever questioned, an entire historic event would barely be falsified in records due to a one persons wrong research. Many people wouldve believed her account despite never even witnessing the genuine footage of the construct collapsing, which took almost 20 plus seconds. This defies the entire logic of the build falling at free-fall speed, shattering the entirely false conspiracy. Not only can such theory affect the emotional stability of researchers, patriots and mutual men and women, but can create a sore tack together in the minds of the victims families that actually underwent trauma through such events. Nevertheless, we now understand that the peculiar collapsing of the building was due to the fact that it had been built with triangles around the sectors of the building because of its enormity. A ma jority of people, however, did not know the truth and based their views on less knowledge associated with something never completely understood. Only when people started looking into the matter themselves was it instantly debunked. If this same process was repeated throughout history, we could find many loopholes. Ultimately, it lies in the individual, whether one would accept or deny the knowledge granted. Perception is what drives this people choose what they believe in.Our reasoning cannot always be right but we are rational beings, capable of making aware decisions with some prior knowledge. Some essential human based facts always will persist and the key to understanding these facts is beyond simply evaluate them. To truly understand a concept one must lease questions about that specific subject and their knowledge can either be further strengthened or their entire perception could change. People unnecessarily take information sculpted by someone elses research without doin g any of their own based on the idea that the researcher who took the time to do the investigation must be correct. It must be regarded as false until the point when the one who receives the information actually looks into the matter and validates the knowledge.In a world where information changes every day, some persist, and some simply vanish creating needless new ideas. One such idea that had been so ingrained in the mind of humanity was the concept of a electrostatic universe. This image of the universe had persisted even until the twentieth century. In fact, one of the sterling(prenominal) intellectual minds Albert Einstein even believed in this concept. When he had created his theory of the universe, the commonplace theory of relativity, in 1915 he added a completely irrelevant and plain random concept just to accommodate it. He introduced the idea of a cosmological immutable, an all pervading force that would prevent the universe contracting from solemnity and remain sta tic. Before this, though Edwin Hubble had observed a red dismissal in the galaxies nearby and an even larger shift in those further. A red shift occurs when light that is emitted by a source, a extragalactic nebula for example, that is moving away from the observer becomes elongated. This phenomenon was observed on all sides of us and it increases with distance, meaning that the universe was expanding in all directions. Einstein did not accept this knowledge and had unnecessarily complicated his theory by adding a constant that clearly made no sense. The information that was proven true was not accepted, as a previous knowledge was stuck in his mind circumscribe his ability to formulate a realistic theory. Later, he understood the validity of the information and incorporated the idea of an expanding universe into his theory. A theory antecedently thought false was proven true and needlessly discarded.But, the campaign to question, the urge to want to know more will always be a c rucial part of the human mind. This is what will lead us to want to change the knowledge we know today and enhance current knowledge. It doesnt stop there though perception is the key to becoming a knowledgeable thinker. If one thinks critically about all the minute and super C paradigms of the universe, the inventive scope for more knowledge could be limitless.Bibliographyhttp//oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/Philosophers/Protagoras/protagoras_plato_knowledge.htmhttp//science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/scientific-experiments/scientific-method5.htmhttp//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiabilityhttp//listverse.com/2009/01/19/10-debunked-scientific-beliefs-of-the-past/http//www.pasteurbrewing.com/the-life-and-work-of-louis-pasteur/experiments/louis-pasteurs-experiment-to-refute-spontaneous-generation/204.htmlhttp//www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm11 http//oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/Philosophers/Protagoras/protagoras_plato_knowledge.htm2 http//science.howstuffworks.c om/innovation/scientific-experiments/scientific-method5.htm3 http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability4 http//listverse.com/2009/01/19/10-debunked-scientific-beliefs-of-the-past/5 http//www.pasteurbrewing.com/the-life-and-work-of-louis-pasteur/experiments/louis-pasteurs-experiment-to-refute-spontaneous-generation/204.html6 http//www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm