The Theory Of Knowledge Year

A number of approaches to religious diversity has been discussed in class namely: Exclusivism, Inclusivism, Postmodernism, Pluralism, Contextualism, etc. After thoroughly examining the various universal and non-universal ways of approaching religious diversity, I have come to the conclusion that the universal approach of exclusivism is the best approach to confidently assert my religious perspective, while dealing with the variety of religions that exist. The choice was made over Inclusivism, Postmodernism, Pluralism and Contextualism. The limitation of these approaches shall be weighed against my preferred approach which is Exclusivism.

“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world” (Mandela). In discussions of education, Newman argues that there should be a common shared knowledge between people. According to statistics, there are 70% of Americans who do not hold a college degree. Newman’s ideas revolve around the belief that everyone should go to college and pursue a higher education. If Newman’s ideas are implemented in today’s society, there will not only be short term difficulties like a greater demand for teachers and supplies but also long term difficulties with America’s economy. Although Newman’s system sounds like it would create a better world in the surface, it would be one which is hard to apply in today’s American society.

Along with senses, evidence I believe is very straightforward when dealing with how we know. Without evidence the court system would not be able to

Q1A) In what ways does the biological constitution of a living organism determine, influence or limit its sense perception?

The evidence collected in an investigation helps make or break a case. Although sometimes the evidence is not physical it can still be powerful. Graat v. The Queen, [1982] 2 SCR 819, 1982 CanLII (SCC) is a case where the crown used opinion evidence in order to win their case. Opinion evidence is hard to make admissible in court because of the exceptions that arise from it. If the witness is an expert in the matter he/she does not need to have seen the event to give his/her opinion and may use the terms “I think or I believe” to be described as opinion evidence. (Bartley, 2016) The observations made, by the witnesses involved, influence their opinions. Their knowledge on the matter, although not experts also influenced their opinions.

The two forms are preponderance of the evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Preponderance is mostly used in civil court, whereas proof beyond a reasonable doubt is used in criminal court. In civil court, the plaintiff must provide factual evidence regarding why he or she is suing the defendant. In a criminal case, a higher standard of evidence is required, which is the proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In most criminal cases the prosecutor must attempt to persuade that the defendant, is, in fact, guilty of the charges brought against them. In criminal cases, the evidence must be circumstantial and adequate enough to decide whether the person is guilty. Which is where the term proof beyond a reasonable doubt derives from. It's another way of saying are you certain, is the proof enough for you to say okay, I have no doubt in my mind that this person is

In Baron Reeds, “A New Argument for Skepticism,” a new idea is brought to light to agree with the argument for skepticism. Usually, skeptical arguments require knowledge to be

Throughout chapter four in Everything’s an Argument, we learn about arguments based on reason and evidence. While both terms may seem similar and are used to strengthen an argument, they both do different things. Evidence, as opposed to reason, refers to anything factual and pre-existing, such as facts, statistics, laws, contracts, witnesses, documents, or any other form of data. Evidence is classified by inartistic proofs, which is the arguments the writer or speaker is given. On the other hand, reason refers to artistic proofs which is an argument the writer creates. If someone does not have the facts to support their claims, they will use reason and common sense. Reason is used to strengthen an argument and may appeal to emotions and logic,

Evidence given by witnesses is usually verbal, and describes what the witness understands about the case; witness testimony is direct evidence (second-hand knowledge is not acceptable).

Scientific evidence can include DNA genetic profiling, time of death determinations, ballistic fingerprinting, drug testing, and many other items. Scientific evidence is information that is linked to cognition that so happen to have been established in applying the precise hypothesis. Which factors in that the groundwork in the evidence is being used; has been demonstrated and certified; it’s usually authorized in the methodical commonality (Find Law, 2014).

Merriam-Webster defines knowledge as “the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association.” This definition of knowledge isn't really helpful because it attempts precision but doesn't arrive anywhere useful. How is knowledge different from knowing? The definition from the dictionary wanders through suggestions related to awareness, understanding, information, and cognition. Each of these terms are quite different from each other.That is why, when we say “Innovation”, understanding these terms becomes a necessity or we are going to have a vague understanding about innovation.

“Physical evidence cannot be wrong; it cannot perjure itself; it cannot be wholly absent. Only its interpretation can err. Only human failure to find it, study and understand it can diminish its value.”  (Harris vs. United States, 1947).

Evidence plays a major role usually in trail of a case. Several types of evidence can be used. Evidence can be divided into two categories – Testimonial evidence and Physical evidence. Physical evidence is one type of such evidence; this evidence can be brought to court room for observation during trails. This is the most important evidence. Physical evidence is also known as real evidence, they consist tangible article from tiny microscopic to macroscopic evidence from large building to molecules in air. It can be in solid, gas or liquid form. Advances in forensic science have increased the use of physical evidence

or that death is not the end. There is no way to prove that this is

Evidence implies that an entity presents itself to the knowing cognition of man in such a way that it can be looked at in a direct and immediate manner and be regarded as meaningful. Evidence originates when a given, in its disclosure, is experienced as sense by the human soul, by means of an immediate intuition or observation. The correlation between intuition and the given in its disclosure, constitutes the experience called evidence, and is therefore a composite factor of evidence (Theron, 1995).