We Know With Confidence Only When We No Little, With Knowledge Lens Analysis

“We know with confidence only when we no little; with knowledge, doubt increases”. The quote used in the prescribed title was adapted from famous German writer, statesman and scientist, JW von Goethe. During his lifetime, from 1749 to 1832, knowledge that was supported by sufficient evidence was limited as was a majority of widely accepted scientific knowledge. Goethe’s quote seems unfitting for the era in which he lived with little readily available evidence to back his claim. Despite this fact, the previous quotation shows incredible knowledgeability with foresight and time has proven Goethe to be correct, something that will be proven through this essay. The quote can be supported by evidence from multiple areas of knowledge. However, the
They had been unable to find a perfect square root for the number 2 using only whole numbers. Pythagoras was absolutely sure that there was a whole number that when multiplied by itself would equal two. This was before the time that decimals had been widely accepted and almost all mathematicians worked with fractions. One day a man named Hippasus came along and proved that there was no whole number or fraction that when squared would equal 2 using Pythagoras’s own theorem. Legend states that Pythagoras’s group threw Hippasus into a body of water and drowned him for factually disproving his dream. In modern times, the nonexistence of a perfect square root of 2 and that the answer is an irrational number is known to be an absolute fact. The aforementioned scenario relates to the title in that Pythagoras was absolutely sure with confidence that he
This is also true in the modern era with the theory of global warming or climate change. It is a disputed theory that is generally accepted to be fact. But can science ever really be accepted as fact? This knowledge question can be answered differently depending on one’s interpretation of science. The classic interpretation would be no. Most things that are accepted as facts in science are theories, literally meaning they cannot be proven to be true, and at any time someone could discover something to disprove it. We have what we call natural laws, but those may only be true in our universe. The counter interpretation would be yes, things in science can be accepted as fact if there is nothing to disprove them. However, which one is better for the human race. I am inclined to pick the former because it implies that there are other possibilities to discover and that more research can be done. When in collusion with Goethe’s quote, the first interpretation suggests that the more we know, the more we will be able to discover and the more our world will