2. What Are the Differences Between "I Am Certain" and "It Is Certain", and Is Passionate Conviction Ever Sufficient for Justifying Knowledge?
Theory Of Knowledge Essay
Mr. Douglas Parker
Word Count: 1, 316
2. What are the differences between "I am certain" and "it is certain", and is passionate conviction ever sufficient for justifying knowledge?
Certainty is a very difficult subject to tackle. Consider the many levels of certainty. Some might say that only science and mathematics can dictate what is indeed certain. Other critics may say that most science is based on models and experiments, so how do we know that there isn't a scenario where the rules of science can be disproven. It's happened before and thus, the birth of the "Bohr-Rutherford Model". Mathematics however is something much harder to disprove. Mathematicians alike would tell you that 1 + 1 does in fact equal 2, but some children may disagree. When I was a child I learned that 1 + 1 = window. As harmless as this may seem, it does a wonder job of proving that there are many levels of certainty, because if you think that you would tell me that 1 + 1 = 2 back when I was seven years old, then you may want to question you're certainty.
It seems to be quite obvious that as humans we like to be right all the time. It would then also make sense that we would expand the truth or for those who don't understand what is meant by this, lie. How you ever been in a heated discussion with you're parents where you are on the spot for an answer which you do not know? I certainly have. I can remember several times in fact where I had actually given an answer even though I doubted myself. My parents would often read through me and come up with a counter argument. Often times before even hearing what they had to say, I would decide to stand by my answer and argue it. One might say, how might you argue for something which you do not know? I would then respond with an answer like growing up as the second youngest of five children helps to teach you many different ways of arguing. A tried and true method would be to base your argument upon what is deemed
Mr. Douglas Parker
Word Count: 1, 316
2. What are the differences between "I am certain" and "it is certain", and is passionate conviction ever sufficient for justifying knowledge?
Certainty is a very difficult subject to tackle. Consider the many levels of certainty. Some might say that only science and mathematics can dictate what is indeed certain. Other critics may say that most science is based on models and experiments, so how do we know that there isn't a scenario where the rules of science can be disproven. It's happened before and thus, the birth of the "Bohr-Rutherford Model". Mathematics however is something much harder to disprove. Mathematicians alike would tell you that 1 + 1 does in fact equal 2, but some children may disagree. When I was a child I learned that 1 + 1 = window. As harmless as this may seem, it does a wonder job of proving that there are many levels of certainty, because if you think that you would tell me that 1 + 1 = 2 back when I was seven years old, then you may want to question you're certainty.
It seems to be quite obvious that as humans we like to be right all the time. It would then also make sense that we would expand the truth or for those who don't understand what is meant by this, lie. How you ever been in a heated discussion with you're parents where you are on the spot for an answer which you do not know? I certainly have. I can remember several times in fact where I had actually given an answer even though I doubted myself. My parents would often read through me and come up with a counter argument. Often times before even hearing what they had to say, I would decide to stand by my answer and argue it. One might say, how might you argue for something which you do not know? I would then respond with an answer like growing up as the second youngest of five children helps to teach you many different ways of arguing. A tried and true method would be to base your argument upon what is deemed