Doubt Is The Key To Knowledge: Is It True - Essay Example

15 October, Doubt is the key to knowledge: Is it true? Introduction: In this essay, I will look at the above question as it seems to play a major role in the study of knowledge and its nature. I will cover two, in my opinion, main areas of knowledge that correspond to these questions of attaining knowledge, i.e. science and philosophy. It is vital to define what above proverb means before I could talk about anything else as, the statement itself raises a knowledge issue. It is relatively easier to define doubt as one’s tendency to suspect something. However the word “key” raises a problem with understanding whether the statement tells us that doubt can act as an engine for gaining new knowledge or whether it helps us to understand the knowledge we already possess. Another knowledge issue with that topic is the extent to which, doubt can be reasoned. Also, it remains to be explored what are the differences between doubting something and simply not wanting to believe the obvious and whether expressions like art, emotions and opinion can be doubted in the same way as the righteousness of physical laws and mathematical equations. Personally I see doubt as a key to understanding knowledge, but not as something that can help one gain knowledge. Someone holding an opposite opinion can disagree with me backing him up with countless examples of doubt influencing new discoveries and leading to gaining knowledge like in the case of Rutherford doubting Bohr’s “liquid drop” model of an atom and discovering atomic nucleus. However in my defense, I shall say that in many cases doubt can prevent one from gaining knowledge. Scientists have doubted even a possibility of existence of an atom for many decades. And any attempts to prove existence of such a thing were seen as a waist of time, and was disapproved. Only few ones like Boltzman and Gibbs were brave enough to research, though even they did not succeed. It was indeed, Einstein who did not have a doubtful mood, and yet proved the existence of an atom in 1905. (Kaku, 2007). That example tells us that the doubt can have a negative effect on knowledge. This paper tends to evaluate these views with reference to two knowledge areas, namely science and philosophy. Science: We all know that research is the fundamental means to develop knowledge and awareness about new technologies and creations. However, the validity of a research always remains questionable because of the fact that it is principally based on the evaluation of hypothesis that is formulated in the start of the research. That means, the researchers already have a fair idea of what the results are most probably going to be once the research is complete. Even if the null hypothesis is not justified, researchers do know the alternative hypothesis, before practically starting the research. This leads to the development of idea that researchers do have a preliminary knowledge of the subject they intend to investigate in the research. What drives them towards doing the research is the doubt about the subject, that they want to eliminate. However, a hypothesis is never proven right or wrong. Even if a null hypothesis is rejected, it does not in any way, mean that it is proved wrong. This pertains to the fact that it is often, not possible to involve the whole population in the research about which a certain aspect is studied. In addition to this, there are time, budget and availability constraints that limit the validity of the results of a research. However, the researchers’ effort to investigate the matter by involving a shear sample representative of the population is only an attempt to add value to the arguments they make. So, if one does not believe the results of a research, it is not that one is neglecting the obvious. Instead, it is just that the results can never practically be obvious even if full population is studied in a research because of many natural factors that affect the response of the research participants at the time of investigation and the comprehension of the data retrieved on the part of the researchers. Physical laws and mathematical equations are often “proved” because they are a fundamental trait of the nature. The laws have been implemented in the development of technologies that have worked as were intended by the creators. Yet there always remains the capacity for a new scientific theory and mathematical equations that can negate the one that had been previously acknowledged for long. Knowledge is fundamentally acquired by the world around us. We already know things. It is just that we tend to correlate various areas of knowledge in order to enhance our understanding of the way things work. However, doubt upon the validity of the results of a research can be minimized, though never completely eradicated, by conducting more and more research about the same matter and considering the maximum size of sample for investigation. Therefore, I would conclude by asserting that doubt does make us enhance our understanding about the things we already are familiar with. “An idea is perceived clearly if it is present and apparent to an attentive mind…” (Descartes cited in The Professor Network, 2010). I shall not underestimate the opinion of my contemporaries that refer to Newton who, being curious about the fall of an apple, revealed laws of physics which were not previously known. However, they must realize the fact that laws had always been there in the nature. It is just that Newton happened to do experiments with the knowledge he was already equipped with to discover them. Philosophy: In the Persian proverb, “doubt is the key to knowledge”, the word “key” has been used as a metaphor, which is indeed, a very sensitive issue in that metaphors are only used if one object totally resembles the other in attitude, characteristics and various other traits. When looked at from this point of view, one becomes quite skeptical about the validity of the relation between doubt and knowledge put forth in the proverb. I personally feel that although doubt plays an important role in maturing one’s understanding of the knowledge one is equipped with, yet it can not be called as the key to knowledge as knowledge can be attained without the key of doubt in one’s hand. A critical analysis of the proverb suggests that knowledge is locked somewhere, that can only be accessed with the key of doubt. That is not true. An infant knows how to get fed from the mother not because he/she had a doubt in mind. It is indeed, the knowledge the infant was naturally born with. Similarly, children go to school for education not because they have some doubt in their mind. Why are they getting knowledge then? “It is that scientific knowledge enables us to do all kinds of things and to make all kinds of things.” (Feynman, para. 4). This leads us to the question: Does the proverb speak of some particular kind of knowledge? I think, yes, it does! The proverb fundamentally talks about knowledge that is acquired as a result of its need. It talks about “new knowledge” in particular. This is similar to the famous proverb: “Necessity is the mother of invention.” Things are invented making use of the knowledge inventors are equipped with. Although doubt does play a role in making right matches of the various areas of knowledge, yet it only serves as a minor tool. Some of my contemporaries might challenge me saying that I am now confessing that doubt plays the role of a tool, so it should be “key”. However, there is a huge difference between any tool and key. First of all, gaining existing knowledge does not require any tool whatsoever. However, new knowledge (that the world is previously unfamiliar with) is explored with the help of doubts, yet it is basically a product of the existing knowledge, and the role of a doubt is too low to be equated to that of a key. Conclusion: Summing it up, doubt about a certain matter provides a man with a reason for conducting a research, though it is not important enough to be referred to as the key to knowledge as there can be, and often are, cases where the researcher did not conduct the research because of any doubt, but instead, went for it only because he/she wanted to know more. I would have acknowledged the truth of the statement had it been “necessity is the key to new knowledge”. Man needed to fly, so he studied the factors that helped birds fly. “Birds and other winged creatures that fly are the source of inspiration for the invention of Airplanes.” (Stonecypher (ed.), 2010). After conducting the research on birds, man developed airplanes. However, there is no role of doubt in gaining the knowledge that already exists. We study the laws of motion just because they have already been identified and are among the fundamentals of physics. It is not because we have any doubt in mind. Works cited: Feynman, Richard, P. “The Value Of Science.” 11 March 2010. Web. 15 Oct. 2010. . Kaku, Michio. “Getting Physical: Dr. Michio Kaku Explains Einstein’s Genius.” Carlini Group. 2007. Web. 15 Oct. 2010. . “Rene Descartes: (1596-1650).” The Professor Network. 2004-2010. Web. 15 Oct. 2010. . Stonecypher, Lamar. (ed.). “Engineering Marvels: Tools and Machines Inspired by Nature.” Bright Hub Inc. 2010. Web. 15 Oct. 2010. . Read More