The Myth of Neutrality in Knowledge - Essay Example

The Myth of Neutrality in Knowledge Introduction The most common interpretation of neutral question is that it does not exert any pressure on the respondent to provide any pre- conceived or definite answers. As opposed to a leading question where the questioner appears to guide the respondent to a pre-defined answer, in a neutral question the questioner does not have any vested interest. In case of a neutral question, the respondent has the freedom to provide any answer and also has the option to remain silent. Since the respondent feels no pressure in case of a neutral question, so very often the answer may turn out to be accurate (Davis, 211; Kumar, 384). For instance, “Why do you think he is leaving the company?” This is apparently a neutral question since the best answer is obviously known to the person who is leaving the company. The questioner’s interest is superficial or mere curiosity or else the question would have been placed with the person concerned. In the most elementary form, neutral questions are those which are asked by innocent children who express their curiosity over anything they see or hear. Questions like “From where does babies come?” are common neutral questions since the children who frame these questions do not have any pre-conceived notions and can be satisfied by any random answer. In such cases, the questioner, i.e. the children have no inherent interest in the questions other than curiosity. Since, as already explained, in a case of a neutral question there is no apparent interest in the mind of the questioner therefore such questions are generally unemotional and open. However, this paper is concerned with the statement that there is no such thing as a neutral question. In the sociological perspective, the weight of a question is determined by the social context, i.e. answers can vary depending on whom the question is targeted. Therefore, “a sociologist who does not subject his own questioning to sociological questioning will be incapable of making a truly neutral sociological analysis of the answer it receives” (Bourdieu, 41). The following section evaluates the thesis statement with two areas of knowledge. Scientific knowledge In the realm of science, knowledge is based on real questions with concrete and experimentally proven answers. A question cannot be neutral since the questioner expects a pre-conceived answer, i.e. a hypothesis based on which his future work will be constructed. The most critical aspect of scientific knowledge is that a scientist can ask a question of whys and hows for the reason that he will be seeking an explanation for his question. Now, the question remains whether in science it is possible to ask a neutral question to a problem. It can happen only if the concerned problem is designed in the manner so that it can be addressed in an ordinary natural language or if the problem is subjected within an observational framework which is itself based on a neutral theory. Here, theory is neutral when the results of the observation are not based on any pre-structured notions based on prior observations. In other words, the scientist does not expect answers based on any pre-suppositions or any scientific theory or hypothesis. For instance, there can be a question like “why do planets revolve around the sun in elliptical orbits instead of circular ones?” or “why the volume of metallic elements increase in volume when there is a rise in temperature?” Both the questions are framed in the manner that they stand on prior scientific theories. In the first question it is assumed that planets revolve round the sun in elliptical orbits and not circular ones, and in the second question it is assumed that metallic elements increase in volume with rise in temperature and not vice versa. In both the cases, the questions could not be framed without such pre-conceived theories (Pandit, 85). Such questions cannot be neutral since the answers are scientifically pre- established. The reason why planets revolve round the sun in elliptical orbits has been determined just like the reason why metallic elements increase in volume with rise of temperature. Therefore, the scientist, when asking such questions expects these pre-determined answers and any contrary answers will be subjected to further scientific experiments. Religious knowledge In the context of religious knowledge, it is assumed that faith comes from the assumption that ideas are created and executed by a higher power. The philosopher Roy Clouser asserts neutrality as myth in religion, which if put differently “means that every discussion of truth will wind up being a debate about some kind of theology, however tacit, hidden, or under- acknowledged” (Thornbury, 3). Clouser further exerts that every individual, irrespective of his or her religious faith, maintains a kind of belief that has the status of being “unconditionally non-dependent reality” (Clouser, 23). However, such belief is irrespective of the fact that different people have different bases of such belief like the Bible or Koran. It is not possible for human beings to exist in the manner that they do without the support of a belief that life is created and controlled by a divine power, no matter what name they choose to give that power like Jesus Christ by the Christians or the Allah by the Muslims. The choice of such faith can manifest either in the belief that there is a living God or an idol. Clouser has also explained the condition of scientific theories that are generally accepted as prove of fact. He has stated that it is reality that acts as conduit between religious faith and scientific theories. All scientific theories are based on pre-conceived concepts while all such concepts are triggered by some pre-supposed “per se divinity belief” (Clouser, 78). Conclusion From the above discussion it can be concluded that neutral questions are myths in different areas of knowledge. Every idea or faith is supported by pre-conceived ideas, and as such the question of neutrality remains a myth. In the world of science, it is true that there is an abundant of questions that apparently appear to be neutral. However, for major and accurate scientific deductions, the answers that are derived from such questions through experiments are subjected to logical confirmation. References Bourdieu, Pierre. The Craft of Sociology: Epistemological Preliminaries, Walter de Gruyter, 1991 Clouser, Roy A. The Myth of Religious Neutrality, Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 2005 Davis, Leslie. Interviewing, Interrogation & Communication For Law Enforcement, Xlibris Corporation, 2014 Kumar, Raj. Basic Business Communication, New Delhi: Excel Books, 2010 Pandit, G.L. The Structure and Growth of Scientific Knowledge, Springer, 1983 Thornbury, Gregory Alan. “Prolegomena: Introduction to the Task of Theology.” 2-70. In A Theology for the Church, ed. Daniel L. Akin. B&H Publishing Group, 2007 Read More