Scientific Knowledge
For some people science is the supreme form of all knowledge. Is this view reasonable or does it involve a misunderstanding of science or of knowledge?
For many persons science is considered the supreme form of all knowledge, as science is based on facts and theories and it reaches its results through an approved scientific method. Consequently, it seems to be objective and thus more truthful and reliable. However, other persons argue that this is a misunderstanding of science. Hence, one should question what science and knowledge entail. Can there actually be some form of knowledge that overrules all other types of human knowledge? Is scientific knowledge actually always objective? Are there other types of knowledge of equal worth? This essay will discuss the views presented mainly using examples from biology and history and comparing them to the different ways of knowing, i.e. perception, reasoning, emotion and language to try and reach a conclusion on whether scientific knowledge really is a higher form of knowledge.
Firstly, before attempting to discuss the topic at hand, it is important to define the terms "knowledge", "science" and "supreme". According to Webster 's Encyclopaedic Dictionary "knowledge" is defined as "the acquaintance with facts, truths, or principles gained by sight, experience, or investigation"1. "Science" is a branch of knowledge that has purpose to "describe, explain, understand, investigate, predict, and control"2. The term "supreme" is defined as "the highest in rank, authority, and/or quality"3. Now, to put these definitions in context, one must recognise that scientific knowledge, to have the status of the highest in authority and quality, it has to be reliable and consistent with reality. And since scientific knowledge is based upon investigations and observations of the environment around us (i.e. reality), it must be supreme. However, what can be questioned is the degree of supremacy within different types of
For many persons science is considered the supreme form of all knowledge, as science is based on facts and theories and it reaches its results through an approved scientific method. Consequently, it seems to be objective and thus more truthful and reliable. However, other persons argue that this is a misunderstanding of science. Hence, one should question what science and knowledge entail. Can there actually be some form of knowledge that overrules all other types of human knowledge? Is scientific knowledge actually always objective? Are there other types of knowledge of equal worth? This essay will discuss the views presented mainly using examples from biology and history and comparing them to the different ways of knowing, i.e. perception, reasoning, emotion and language to try and reach a conclusion on whether scientific knowledge really is a higher form of knowledge.
Firstly, before attempting to discuss the topic at hand, it is important to define the terms "knowledge", "science" and "supreme". According to Webster 's Encyclopaedic Dictionary "knowledge" is defined as "the acquaintance with facts, truths, or principles gained by sight, experience, or investigation"1. "Science" is a branch of knowledge that has purpose to "describe, explain, understand, investigate, predict, and control"2. The term "supreme" is defined as "the highest in rank, authority, and/or quality"3. Now, to put these definitions in context, one must recognise that scientific knowledge, to have the status of the highest in authority and quality, it has to be reliable and consistent with reality. And since scientific knowledge is based upon investigations and observations of the environment around us (i.e. reality), it must be supreme. However, what can be questioned is the degree of supremacy within different types of
Bibliography: Acton, Edward. Rethinking the Russian Revolution. Arnold Publishers, 1990. Pipes, Richard. Den Ryska Revolutionen. Stockholm; Natur och Kultur, 1990. 1 Webster 's Encyclopaedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language. 1989, Gramerce Book, New York. p. 792. 2 Abel, Reuben. Man Is the Measure. New York; The Free Press, 1976. p. 82 3 Webster 's Encyclopaedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language 4 Pipes, Richard. Den Ryska Revolutionen. Stockholm; Natur och Kultur, 1990. p. 161 5 Acton, Edward 6 Abel, Reuben. Man Is the Measure. New York; The Free Press, 1976. p. 82 © Copyright 2005 Cassandra Flavius (FictionPress ID:375156)