Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Question : “Accepting knowledge claims always involves an element of trust…
Question : “Accepting knowledge claims always involves an element of trust.” Discuss this claim with reference to two areas of knowledge.
Words/Terms to Define
-
Knowledge : Educational information obtained from resources such as books , internet, and medea, as well as information obtained consciously and subconsciously from one’s peers.
Claim 1: We trust our peers and are more likely to absorb knowledge from them : It is human nature to trust peers in our ingroups and to find the the community that we have been encultured to, more reliable
Evidence : Human Sciences ( specifically psychology )
- In groups / out groups
- Enculturation vs. Aculturation
Evidence : The way we interpret meaning from our parents and teachers ( more likely to trust what your parents say than other - hence why so many kids have the same political views as their parents.
-
Counter Claim 1: Sometimes accepting knowledge claims does not require an element of trust, but solely accumulation of reason and evidence
Evidence: Theoretical Physics: A lot of people don't believe in leading theories like String theory and inflation theory, but there is so much evidence where the scientific community and societal is general is coerced into accepting this produced knowledged.
For example if personally I do not trust physicist Lisa Randall due to personal reasons generated form my emotions, I still accept the knowledge claims she produced about string theory, I still accept her knowledge because of the overwhelming evidence produced from the field.
Evidence: Evolution - Evolution negates several religious claims, but the abundance of evidence supporting evolution causes religious systems and individuals to accept the knowledge claims propelled by evolution
-
-
-
AOK's
IKS - we typically don't trust it, but a lot of great medicines have come to us this way. It takes more effort to trust IKS.
-
Human Sciences - psychological constructs influence what we view as “ trustworthy” and the way individuals absorb information. - combine this with RKS for distinc examples
-
-
Counter Claim 2: Individuals and Societies can be coerced and persuaded into accepting knowledge claims, making any element of trust uninfluential in the absorption of knowledge
-
-
-
WOK's
The Arts - Emotions ( Our emotions dictate one's perspective on art, and the element of trust behind art establishes it credibility - bidirectional)
Human Science + RKS - Sense Perception ( the manner in which individuals interpret and view things is constructed off of psychological concepts which has been evident through historical events involving religion)
RKS- Faith+ Reason ( Blind faith to those in power, as a result of “ trust - can evidence/reason evolve blind faith?)
IKS- Intuition, reason ( IKS often lack credibility towards the idea because of archaic traditions and lack of industrialization, but that is not enough to discredit their solidified ideas. It is our intuition- you can implement some psychology here- to abolish trust towards societies less progressed than our own)
Knowledge Concepts
Validity, Evidence, Justification, Authority, Credibility Subjectivity, Data
CounterClaim 3:“Accepting knowledge claims always involves an element of trust is a rather ambiguous statement the foundations of trust are subjective. Is it more reliable to construct trust off of emotion + intuition or reason + evidence - so much of our trust is developed off of emotion and intuition but is that really reliable ? However, in a digital age is really reliable to construct trust off reason and evidence which has a high chance of being false? We extract information from social media and apply to real life simply because we saw it, not necessary because it is trusted.
-