Candidate # 002203-069 Asharib Syed
as a way of knowing (its subjective interpretations, the inability of words to
represent human thoughts, and possible translation gaps) entertain limitations in understanding. Having discussed preliminary details with regardsto the proverb, we can now voyage into evaluating the validity of the prescribed title in two areas of knowledge,science and history.The causes and effects of doubt are adequate grounds of comparison between the areas of knowledge of history and science. In science, doubt is often caused by reason or sense perception. Scientists doubt the dubiousclaims of individuals predicting earthquakes based on the aches and ‘feeling’ of their knee bones. As uraniumdecays it creates radon gas which collects in underground pockets; these trapped gasses are released by tremors thatoccur days before earthquakes. Hence, scientists used deductive reasoning and concluded that wherever releasedradon gas can be detected, an earthquake would soon follow
.In this situation, seismologists doubted the knowledgeclaims of individuals basing earthquake prediction on intuition. Using
doubt, they sought to discover amore scientific approach in predicting earthquakes. Hence, objective doubts and curiosity led to the discovery of anew technique which now gives locals knowledge of impending earthquakes. In this case, objective doubts led to a pursuit of discovery, which in turn produced knowledge.In the area of knowledge of science, cases where objective doubt leads to knowledge are ubiquitous.Subatomic particles known as neutrinos are a product of radioactive decay. They emerge from cosmic events andregularly bombard the Earth. However, magnetic fields in space make the discovery of these neutral particles (and physical proof, beyond theory) impossible. Scientists have set out to prove the physical existence of neutrinos beyond doubt by using sense perception. When neutrinos hit arctic ice they create a ‘muon’ particle which gives aflash of blue light—this light when captured by photo sensors set in the ice (visual observation, sense perception)gives physical proof that neutrinos exist
. Hence, the pursuit of objective doubt often creates an inquisitivecuriousness that when seeking proofs, leads to knowledge. Conversely, if doubt arises
are not sought, than doubt creates only questions and not answers, or knowledge. In science when doubt createsquestions, those questions create a pursuit for answers, hence these ‘answers’ lead to knowledge.While
doubt in the area of science may inspire discovery and curiosity, leading to knowledge;
doubt in History, contrastingly, may not lead to knowledge. Emotion and language are two subjectiveways of knowing which play significant roles in the area of knowledge of history. At the end of WWI, article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles known as the ‘war guilt clause,’ put the entire war’s blame solely on Germany
. Europeannations that lost millions of lives and were suffering from war debt, found it emotionally suitable to put unilateral blame on Germany’s aggressions. Within a decade as ‘
cooled,’ Sydney Bradshaw Fay doubted the earlier opinion and presented a theory that explained the cause of World War 1 as being more complex than just ‘it’sGermany’s fault.’ He argued that WWI was caused by an intricate combination of balance of power diplomacy,alliances, nationalism and economic reasons. However, historians and nations around the world did not suddenly
Popular Science, December 2010, pg 25
Ibid, pg 17-19
“Doubt Is the Key to Knowledge” (Persian Proverb). to What Extent Is This True in Two Areas of Knowledge?
1804 WordsJun 11th, 20128 Pages
“Doubt is the key to knowledge” (Persian Proverb). To what extent is this true in two areas of knowledge?
As a Persian proverb once said to have progress in knowledge it is necessary to doubt. In other words, when we begin to doubt what we believed was true, we move forward to better knowledge making a further step to Absolute Truth. To what extent is doubt involved into the process of gaining knowledge? What is the function of doubt? To what extent is doubt either an engine or a brake to the progress in different areas of knowledge? To reveal the different facets of this issue I explored it by examining Natural Science and History.
We found that the theory did not fit the facts, and we were delighted because this is…show more content…
However, it’s complicated to doubt correctly because the border between a scientist and a paranoiac is very unclear and if there’s too much doubt it might lead to developing relativistic ideas which suppose that there’s no certain truth in the world. To avoid it a scientist could base his speculation on firm ground. How can s/he guess that particular point is more or less unquestionable? One way is to turn to one of the tests for truth. However, the tests for truth don’t guarantee that a claim is true, so, in this case, a scientist has to act intuitively to feel for right direction for exploring using these tests and his/her genius as guidelines.
However, the problem of certainty is that for our time, for current paradigms this point of view about incontrovertibility of some facts might be true but there are many examples when shifts of paradigms happened and “impossible” ideas really began working, e.g. idea of N. Tesla about the method of wireless data communication. At the beginning of the XX century his idea was considered nonsense but now wireless data communication is a daily and usual thing. Thus, such basic point should be checked by time, i.e. it should be true for at least some consequent paradigms.
The charm of History and its enigmatic lessons consists in fact that from age to age, nothing changes and yet is completely different.
The essence of History is to describe an event, to determine the main forces in History and to do it