The Philosophy of Knowledge - Essay Example

 Philosophy of Knowledge Knowledge and truth are terms which have for a long time been associated with positive issues in human cultures and this is mainly because they are viewed as ideal norms in most societies. While this may be the case, from a philosophical viewpoint, truth and knowledge are essentially different and this is mainly as a result of their definitions. The understanding of knowledge is that it is acquired and truth is eternal; never changing but remaining constant. The meaning of knowledge has been subject of debate for the whole of human civilization and its definitions have been developed from a wide perspective. Knowledge has been defined as a wide spectrum of philosophical problems which have been used as a means of questioning the truth of situations or questions (Le Morvan, 2004, p.706). This definition is one which does not take into account the belief that knowledge can also be constant and that it is possible for knowledge to be absolute. Furthermore, it is knowledge which allows individuals in society to determine the truth concerning different matters and this allows for the development of a situation where it is nearly impossible for knowledge to be separated from truth. While truth remains constant, knowledge frequently changes and this in such a way that an idea or an opinion which is considered to be a fact today may not necessarily be a fact in the future (Ramsey 1990, p.153). The evolving nature of knowledge can be considered to be a manifestation of its highly unstable nature where it undergoes frequent changes over time. While this may be the case, knowledge is also a means through which cultures are developed and this is done through the transmission of what is believed by a certain society to future generations. When knowledge is compared to truth, it can be suggested that the latter should be able to withstand the test of time and retain its basic truths (Church, 1962, p.322). Such situations tend to be extremely rare considering that the changes in society and the environment often ensure that opinions concerning different aspects of life often change over time. Truth is what human beings hold to be unchanging and this means that it is essential for it to remain constant in order to ensure its credibility (McGarry 2010, p.8). The argument for the constant nature of truth was the belief, before the theory of evolution was developed by Charles Darwin, it was common belief in Europe that all creation came into being in seven days. This belief was in line with the predominantly Christian biblical teachings that were prevalent in Europe during this age. All these changed with the development of the development of the theory of evolution and it is now considered a fact that all creatures evolved from more primitive forms over millions of years. What remains to be seen is whether the theory of evolution will continue to be considered true knowledge in the near future or it is it possible that new research will reveal it to be irrelevant. The above example shows that while knowledge frequently changes based on the manner through which societies evolve, truth remains the same no matter the circumstances. Following Aristotle’ and Socrates’ beliefs, truth are eternal and it cannot be changed because it is based on reflection and reason rather than being known by the beliefs of individuals (Gettier 1963, p.121). Truth can be considered to be essential for the development of the general human beliefs, although the latter do not necessarily represent the absolute truth. Knowledge is also essential because it allows for the reflection as well as reason that makes possible the discovery or realization of truth (Pritchard 2007, p.85). It should be noted that it is through knowledge that it is possible for the development of a situation where a system of beliefs in most societies. However, knowledge does not necessarily reflect on truth because what some individuals in society might believe to be true might not necessarily be so. One would suggest that there are instances where it is not possible for individuals in society to realize that what they believe in is not the truth, because the knowledge system that they have developed does not allow them to think beyond it. Truth is a fact that has been proven beyond doubt and unlike knowledge; it is not subject to the different opinions of individuals in society (Peirce 1901, p.565). In the modern world, truth is what has been scientifically proven through different tests as well as diverse studies and all that has not been proven is not considered to be truth. The same is the case with the belief in God where there is a constant belief of the existence of a supreme being as a result of the existence of the universe as well as human beings (Ford 2008, p.82). While for most individuals, the existence of human beings is a testament to the existence of a supreme being, and therefore the truth, human knowledge has yet to prove that God actually exists. In conclusion, while issues can be termed as absolute truth is possible in human society; it can only be achieved if its conclusions are beyond reproach by the critics. This is also the case in situations where it is essential to develop knowledge concerning different issues that are believed to be based on truth. If the knowledge that is involved is simple, then would be faultless or perfect because the answers to the questions being asked can be easily gotten and proven beyond doubt. For example, if one wanted to assemble a new desktop computer and had no prior knowledge of how to do it correctly, all he would have to do would be to read the user manual that came with the computer in question and this would allow him to get the information instantly. However, one would state that knowledge and truth are interdependent because these, despite their differences, need each other to provide validation and verification for themselves. There are instances where the belief in what is true completely relies on the development of knowledge so that the truth can be accepted and appreciated by society. References Church, A. 1962, "Truth, Semantical", In Dagobert D. Runes (ed.), Dictionary of Philosophy. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams, and Company. Gettier, E., 1963, "Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?". Analysis 23(6), pp. 121–23. Ford, D.Y., 2008. "Conducting Cross-Cultural Research: Controversy, Cautions, Concerns, and Considerations." Roeper Review 30(2), pp. 82-92. Le Morvan, P., 2004. "Ramsey on Truth and Truth on Ramsey", British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 12(4), pp.705–718, McGarry, J., 2010. "Exploring the Effect of Conducting Sensitive Research."Nurse Researcher vol. 18, pp. 8-14. Peirce, C.S. (1901), "Truth and Falsity and Error." In J.M. Baldwin (ed.), Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology, vol. 2, pp.565–573. Pritchard, D., 2007. "Recent Work on Epistemic Value". American Philosophical Quarterly, 44(2), pp. 85–110. Ramsey, F.P., 1990. "Facts and Propositions". In F.P. Ramsey, Philosophical Papers, David Hugh Mellor (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Read More