Theories Of The Pursuit Of Knowledge

Many people would argue that knowledge is power, but can too much knowledge be dangerous? How much is too much? Throughout history, the human race has had struggles with “too much knowledge” or going to extreme lengths to gain such knowledge. Is the everlasting quest to know something really worth it? In today’s generation, there is constantly new inventions of technology and theories of science. But maybe knowledge is starting to ruin people’s life and it shouldn’t be sought after. Very similar in the novel Frankenstein, written by Mary Shelley, Victor Frankenstein deals with the deadly pursuit of knowledge. He is constantly intrigued into

“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.

Many of science’s debates and theories are correlated with the objectivity of science. For instance, claims, methods, and experiments/results can act as a type of objective. Helen Longino believes that science is objective due to the ways of the scientific method being put to use and how we approach ideas with our opinions. Her article elaborates upon social dimensions of scientific knowledge that acknowledges objectivity is more of a social culture done within the community which allows criticism to be present. This allows unbiased theories and concepts to be eliminated or reasoned with. She points out the association between social and cognitive values and she offers a reusable approach to why science is objective rather than the two pre-existing

The critically acclaimed novel written by Mary Shelley and published in 1818, delves into a multitude of universal themes throughout the text. One value that drives the plot forward, and leads to character development is the theme, human fulfillment of the pursuit of knowledge. It is Dr. Frankenstein 's unquenchable thirst for knowledge that leads to the future predicaments that ensue after the Creature is conceived and future moral dilemma. An example of Dr. Frankenstein 's disposition that lends itself to the validity of the stated theme, is as follows; “It was the secrets of heaven and earth that I desired to learn; and whether it was the outward substance of things, or the inner spirit of nature and the mysterious soul of man that occupied me, still my inquiries were directed to the metaphysical, or, in its highest sense, the physical secrets of the world” (Shelley 30). The doctor 's preoccupation with his studies, that results in controversy over the suitable nature of such an unobtainable desire, is clearly exemplified in the quote, “If the study to which you apply yourself has a tendency to weaken your affections and to destroy your taste for those simple pleasures in which no alloy can possibly mix, then that study is certainly unlawful, that is to say, not befitting the human mind” (45).

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

There are four fundamental patters of knowing in nursing that are distinguished according to logical type of meaning. The first fundamental pattern of knowing in nursing is empirical. It is described as factual, descriptive, and ultimately aimed at developing abstract, and theoretical explanations. It is exemplary, discursively formulated, and publicly verifiable.

I can relate to this quote because I believe that there is a never a limit to learn and discovering more. People need to observe and experience more to be able to learn and creates their own opinion. This can relate to the idea of natural laws were individuals were pushed to make observations and shape society.

This must not be confused as saying that all viewpoints tell the truth – it merely says that a better understanding of the greater

Experts in the same discipline typically agree with one another as they have the same facts and knowledge. However, when experts disagree with one another in the same discipline, it may cause contradiction between experts. Disagreements come in many different forms such as different opinions, facts, how one perceive things and one’s standard of right or wrong. In certain disciplines, such as history and art are filled with a multitude of disagreement as the two area of discipline are bias and subjective. Thus, different experts may see things differently in one discipline which can also be called area of knowledge. In history, self-serving bias and historical revisionism can alter the interpretation of evidence and influence the perspective

Science is often considered to be devoid of the human qualities that are attributed to other disciplines. Only objective views and claims are valid in scientific research, and as a result, many consider the field to be uninfluenced by the private judgments and beliefs of scientists. Despite its apparently neutral and impersonal character, however, science is ultimately advanced by people, not by isolated ideas. It is therefore subject to the vagaries of human nature, including personal predilections and interests that shape how people frame research questions, distribute resources, and interact with fellow scientists. In this way, bias can easily alter the course of scientific research, usually with negative effects.

“That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”. Do you agree?

How many times have you said, “No way, I do not believe it!” It is our natural tendency not to believe in something that we have not seen with our own eyes or experienced it personally. There is a saying, “seeing is believing” which has led us to a world full of skeptics. We want proof so we are not gullible fools. Skepticism, or scepticism, as it was spelled back in the ancient times, was pondered by philosophers who tried unsuccessfully to figure out the thought process and how we gain knowledge. Philosophers gave deep thought to determine how we arrive at such true beliefs and knowledge of the external world. Three such philosophers were Rene Descartes, David Hume and Christopher Grau. Rene Descartes was a French philosopher in the early 1600’s; David Hume was a Scottish Philosopher in the 1700’s, and Grau an American philosopher Professor born in 1970. The timeline s important because philosophical views have evolved over time. All three men were from different eras, but they each explored, argued, and addressed the topic of skepticism from their philosophical view. This proves that they take the subject of skepticism seriously, just as we should too. There is good reason to believe that a human’s knowledge of the external world results from both a posteriori knowledge acquired through sensory experience and a priori knowledge which is innate. Descartes, Hume, and Grau through their personal views and skeptical

The continued research regarding a Theory of Everything is also supported by a variant of String Theory called M-theory. This theory describes the fundamental building blocks of matter not as individual point-like particles, like electrons, but immensely small strings of energy (Duft). Different particles result from different vibrating patterns of the fundamental strings. When calculations are performed assuming our universe contains more than three dimensions, the mathematics is consistent and highly precise (Kaku). Supposing that this theory is shown to be experimentally valid, then all matter and natural forces could be traced back to how each string behaves to provide a Theory of Everything. Admittedly, experimental evidence for M-theory is difficult to obtain since, in essence, it would require ultra-sensitive detection of something smaller than a quark. However, an eleven-dimensional calculation has been used to explain the behavior of high-temperature superconductors that is simpler than a typical four-dimensional quantum theory is able to provide (Campbell). This provides evidence for the mathematics of String Theory in real-world circumstances that may one day extend to explain the fundamental forces. While String Theory is still far from proposing an experimentally tested Theory of Everything, it is the closest explanation to date and given more time it may prove to be correct.

Knowledge is defined to be facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education. There are two categories that fall under knowledge; personal knowledge and shared knowledge. Shared knowledge refers to what “we know because.” It can also be defined as communicated and constructed knowledge; within culture, social norms, and semiotics. Personal knowledge refers to “I know because.” An expanded definition of personal knowledge refers to personal experiences, values, and perceptions. Shared knowledge changes and evolves over time because of methods that are continuously shared. It is assembled by a group of people. Personal knowledge, on the other hand, depends crucially on the experiences of a particular individual. It is gained

We live in a strange and puzzling world. Despite the exponential growth of knowledge in the past century, we are faced by a baffling multitude of conflicting ideas. The mass of conflicting ideas causes the replacement of knowledge, as one that was previously believed to be true gets replace by new idea. This is accelerated by the rapid development of technology to allow new investigations into knowledge within the areas of human and natural sciences. Knowledge in the human sciences has been replaced for decades as new discoveries by the increased study of humans, and travel has caused the discarding of a vast array of theories. The development of