Tok External Assessment Essay - Knowledge Gives Us a Sense of Who We Are.” to What Extent Is This True in the Human Sciences and Ethics

The bystander effect is a social psychological scenario where a person who is in an urgent situation is not given any help by the people around due to the discourage from the presence of others (whatispsychology.biz, 2017). Social psychologists, John Darley and Bibb Latane, introduced the bystander effect in the 1960s after the murder of Kitty Genovese, a young woman who was stabbed to death outside her home in New York City. It took her attacker more than half an hour to kill her, and during that time, thirty-eight people saw her being murdered, and they did nothing to help her. “The responsibility for helping was diffused among the observers” (Darley & Latane, 1968).

Our actions and interactions with others and society are what define us. Society’s perception of an individual may contrast with that individual’s perception of self. Our actions and interactions with others create certain stigmas which may not change despite progression and change an individual has undergone. But however at the end of the day we are our own creators and we chose who we interact with.

Knowledge is the beginning of wisdom. Knowledge is a gift from God. Knowledge is God, God is a someone, not a something. Full knowledge concerning God can’t be explained.

Walking along the busy street of Manhattan, Katie becomes light headed passing out; although she is in a large group of people, no one stops to help. This phenomenon is called the “bystander effect.” A bystander is often anyone who passed by, witnessed, or even participated in a certain situation (Polanin, Espelage & Pigott, 2012). The bystander effect is the idea that the larger the group, the less likely an individual is to be helped. The likelihood of someone getting helped is inversely compared to the number of people who are around witnessing the event at the time. This phenomenon has played a huge role in the increase of civilians failing to be helped in the past years, and is starting to have more light shined upon it. Knowledge of

Our behaviour is also influenced by the presence of other, no matter how much we believe ourselves to be individuals.

The phrase “I know that I know nothing”, often referred to as the Socratic paradox is famous saying that has been derived from Plato’s account of Socrates in The Apology. It demonstrates Socrates moral philosophy that true wisdom is accepting one’s ignorance. In Delphi of Ancient Greece, there is a sacred temple that lived a woman who has been known to be possessed by the gods, and thus able to obtain answers from them. In 440 BC, the Oracle of Apollo declared that “Socrates was the wisest”, and in great disbelief it made Socrates feel obliged to seek the true meaning of her remark. Socrates did this by “interviewing everyone who had a reputation for knowledge” to prove the oracle was wrong. For instance, in Plato’s Euthyphro, Socrates

The psychologists John Darley and Bibb Latané (1968) were interested in the Genovese incident and sought to find the answer to this psychological phenomenon. In their experiment, Darley and Latané hypothesized that the higher number of bystanders would decrease helping behavior and vice versa. The two manipulated the number of confederates during each trial and recorded the time it took for the participants to report the simulated seizure. Their results confirmed that if were more confederates, each participant would feel less pressured to help, leading to the discovery of the bystander effect.

Knowledge is the greatest power. However, more often than not knowing too much can become a burden. We as a society do know many things, but, do we know when, where, or even whether the individual's information will even be helpful when revealed or just knowing will become a moral burden weighing them down mentally and emotionally.

Based on the results given in the Zimbardo experiment, Zimbardo (1975) contended that identity contrasts of the subjects were substantially less vital than the social circumstance. Zimbardo went considerably more further with his experiment than Milgram had by rejecting the significance of identity qualities for a large portion of one’s behavior in regular day to day existence: He states, Individual behavior is largely under the control of social forces and environmental contingencies rather than personality traits, character, will power or other empirically invalidated constructs. Thus, we create an illusion of freedom by attributing more internal control to ourselves, to the individual, than it actually exists. Thus underestimating the power and pervasiveness of situational controls over behavior because: 1) they are often non-obvious and subtle, 2) we can often avoid entering situations where we might be so controlled, and 3) we label as “weak” or “deviant” people in those situations who do behave differently from how we believe we would. (p. 115)

They depict an experiment where a woman leaves the room and goes into an area where she can not be seen, but she can be heard. She then feigns an injury to provoke a response. [The experiments results were twenty-six individuals waited alone reacted to an accident seventy percent of the time.] Then they reenacted the same accident with individuals in a group, and only twenty-percent offered the person in distress their assistance (Darley and Latane 770). After the experiment, the individuals that did not respond said that they did not want to embarrass her because they thought that it was just a minor injury.

Socrates then introduces the discussion of “what is completely,” “what is and what is not,” and “what is not completely,” (Republic 477a, 478a-478c). Knowledge is to know something that exists (i.e. object of knowledge). While objects of belief consists of what does exist and does not exist. This shows how knowledge is infallible and true belief is fallible. Knowledge is eternal and does not change or go anywhere, and true belief is the opposite.

Socrates, in skepticism, began a search for those with a reputation of wisdom. After studying men and their knowledge, he reasoned that the only true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing. Although one may have extensive understanding in one area, there is way too much knowledge in the world to be contained by one man. Socrates stated, “I found that the men most in repute were all but the most foolish, and that some inferior men were really wiser and better” (Plato, 23). Those who believed that they knew it all could not be more ignorant, and those who admitted ignorance achieved the highest wisdom attainable on earth. Socrates accepted the idea that he, just like all men, contained very little or no wisdom at all. He was content with knowing this, and upon meeting others that lacked this philosophy, felt he was superior to them. He was unsure of the limitations the afterlife had on wisdom, but he was aware of it’s constraints on earth. This self awareness is what gifted him with the highest sense of enlightenment.

A perpetual conflict emanating throughout all mankind questions the significance of knowledge to human nature, regarding knowledge’s definition, acquisition, branches, and value. Major role models in the foundation of philosophy - specifically, in this essay, Plato and Aristotle - obsess over the significance of knowledge and its importance to and relationship with the development of human beings and their mindsets. Although Plato’s view on knowledge describes the internal predisposed essence of all Forms and the need for a superior being to extract them from the student, Aristotle’s outlook resides as more reliable and realistic due to his beliefs in the premise of knowledge in the sensation and perception, with continuing development in memory, experience, art and science, and, ultimately, true wisdom.

Knowledge, in itself, is nothing. It can even be a burden we are gathering tirelessly and than we carry it through a lifetime, climbing obstacles, overcoming challenges, our knowledge barely helping, and sometimes pulling us back instead.

As the great Socrates ones said, that by admiting that you dont know anything, so you can learn something that is how I discover the things that I want to know. The only way of knowing things is the way of becoming conscious of our unknowing, so we can learn. Awareness of the unknowing is the beginning of knowledge. Thus, we can always look for the truth, but the best is if never said that we found it. We may just think of the truth. We may think of what is the truth different in mathematics, the arts and ethics, but let’s never be sure. That is the only way how we are going to become bigger and better people.