Ethical Responsibility of the Possession of Knowledge - Essay Example

Ethical Responsibility of the Possession of Knowledge Theory of knowledge concerns two premises; that we gain knowledge from experience or we gain our knowledge from rational or logical reasoning. The way in which we perceive our environment, those around us, our backgrounds and our current situations influences our use of knowledge. Though knowledge can be gained through study it is through application that it is actually learned. Though we may hold many beliefs these cannot necessarily be considered knowledge. In defining our responsibility for how we apply our knowledge we will examine Einstein’s discovery of the first explosive’s and how that knowledge was applied can be evaluated ethically by any one person with a different response. Was Einstein applying his knowledge of atomic energy in such a way as to ensure responsible use of that knowledge once released? Were others easily able to take advantage of this discovery in ways considered unethical by the general public? Were these discoveries expanded on constantly in order to make this knowledge and ability available to those unqualified to ethically use this knowledge? The Blank Slate theory suggests that we are born without personality traits or tendency’s or factors of heredity. When applying knowledge to this theory experience and reason tell us otherwise. Many famous philosophers and theorist proposed that all of one’s inner being and self was entirely created by the exterior environment. This theory was proven wrong over a continuum of times as genes were expressed, hereditary factors were evident and some individuals were born with a propensity to one area over another despite exact external influences (Andrews :2010). Though the use of this theory was ethical at one time it would no longer be ethical to apply this belief as true knowledge when reason and experience have proven otherwise. Cold Fusion is another area that was based initially on theory though once applied with reason and experience this theory of knowledge became belief which was unfounded. Theory of cold fusion suggested that a nuclear reaction could occur at room temperature and that energy could then be created without the waste associated with nuclear power plants. This theory was proven wrong when other scientists tried to replicate these findings and could not. Despite that it has been argued there is nothing wrong with the theory of cold fusion; simply put new ways have been achieved in order to create atomic energy (Andrews :2010). In using the theory of knowledge in my own personal experiences I am able to relate through the use of pharmaceutical’s in certain cases. Understanding the knowledge behind their conception and research which provides a background of certainty there is still a lack of agreement among different patients who suffer from conditions such as depression; brain chemistry cannot completely be theory of knowledge and much must be based on empirical evidence which leads to a strong belief. This belief is proven wrong in many individuals when they respond differently to medications which alter neurotransmitters within the brain. Einstein’s discovery of MC=2 was applied in such a way that altered millions of lives and changed the course of history. This theory has since been explored further and expanded on as explosives have become simpler and simpler. In applying this knowledge we must question our beliefs concerning the outcome of using this knowledge. While we consider actions such as the controlled demolition of buildings through the use of explosives perfectly ethical we are annoyed when an ordinary citizen is able to apply this knowledge in times of conflict or terrorism. Yet the research and evidence of this theory of knowledge proves through reason and experience that it is not always ethical to use this knowledge or propagate such knowledge. Though Einstein was a forerunner in understanding the nature of explosives billions of dollars have been spent in expanding this knowledge and what will we, as a people, do with this knowledge that we need to simplify it so? Many times we perceive something to be true because it has been popular opinion, we perceive that the use of explosives by government is ethical in America, and that our use of explosives is ethical in times of conflict yet we are appalled when we perceive a threat to our own safety by the use of this knowledge from a foreign entity. How does this foreign entity perceive the use of this knowledge in their homelands? Reason tells them that it is ethical to retaliate in a similar manner, emotion evokes anger and a desire to improve and expand on what is already known. Language barriers between population’s means that many times what one person translates in one way another person will translate in an entirely different way. Knowledge acquired through perception is usually what most of us depend on as we perceive theory to be useful or undesirable in which case it is discarded from our thought processes. Reason allows us to make judgments for ourselves on the ethics of applying certain knowledge just because you have acquired that knowledge. Though you may understand how to create a simple explosive device reason and emotion will guide your justification in the use of this knowledge. Heated emotions or perceived threats against you or what you consider your territory will change your justification or reasoning in applying knowledge rather than being aware of this. Though Einstein discovered how to create the atomic bomb what criteria was used to justify the use of this knowledge? What was considered in making this decision and were those making this decision aware of the long term ramifications? Did this decision reflect the majority and is this the reasoning behind the decision? Many times majority decisions are ruled by the emotions and perceived threats of many versus reasoning. Surely there were alternatives to the use of explosives in the case of the atomic bomb. I have become more aware of my own bias and understand that as an ordinary citizen I am ruled primarily by experience rather than reason. I will often attempt new experiences due to the lack of the experience rather than through reasoning or emotion. I am frequently guided by emotion when responding to a perceived threat though my reactions are controlled and internalized. I am very much against the use of explosive in times of conflict; however as an American reason provides that this is part of our technology which allows us to remain a strong nuclear power as is China. Americans find it unacceptable to read or hear about the use of explosives such as in the case of 911 though our abilities for long range explosive devices far outweigh those of most Countries as does our technology. Knowing this I must question why we must also resort to this manner of mass destruction. I also question many of our ways of knowing; we often know what we are told by sources with a vested interest or a slant in one direction or another. This leads many of us away from being independent thinkers. Reflecting on theory of knowledge allows me to better examine input from the external environment before responding. Is this knowledge based on reason or experience? Is this simply a belief or has my own experience and reasoning led to certainty of what I am told is factual? This paper has allowed me to explore my own thoughts on what justification means to me as well as what emotion and perception do to alter the course of ones actions or application of knowledge. BIBLIOGRAPHY Andrews, Evan. (2010). Top 10 Most Famous Scientific Theories (That Turned out to be Wrong) Read more: http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-wrong.php#ixzz2EKNakKfr. Available: http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-wrong.php. Last accessed 06 December 2012. Van de Lagemaat, R. 2005, Theory of Knowledge for IB Diploma, Cambridge University Press, London. Read More