Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Do you agree that it is “astonishing that so little knowledge can give us…
Do you agree that it is “astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power” (Bertrand Russell)? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.
1) This prescribed title seems to be more intriguing compared to others. This is mostly due to the Bertrand Russel's quote featured in it. The very first question that triggers me is why among all other philosophers, why him? Is it because he is the most notable philosopher in the 20th century? Do people that have more knowledge is qualified to quote this??? Only certain people...
2) The quote supposedly should be longer, why the prescribed tittle only focuses on the last part. is it because it wants to highlight the significance of having little knowledge that give us so much power.
3) The quote must be related to the person who is quoting it. This raises the possibility that his background history influenced why he made this remark. After his parents left him, his desire to learn more about mathematics kept him from committing suicide. Is this what it means to grant someone with power?
4) The PT is asking if we agree or disagree with the quote. There is a chance that this PT may discuss another point of view in which little knowledge cannot give us much power. Maybe a substantial amount of knowledge is required to meet the power needed. Or the knowledge itself can't give us power
2) It is impossible for people for not having any knowledge, at least they know something through their experience. This suggests that everyone could have the power in this earth. Do people even realise the fact that they can do something with the knowledge?
Can power be independent to knowledge. If people can get power not from the knowledge, is there any significance in acquiring or perceiving the knowledge. If this is not the case, it means power is depending to the knowledge. But to what extent does power must be influenced by the knowledge, for how long or to what area of knowledge?
5) From the quote, astonishing can be referred as how miracle it is to know that little knowledge can give us so much power. By knowing the fact that it only requires just a "little", it is surprising for me too. However, quoted by a person who is acknowledged as having one of the highest IQ, it might be a questionable thing. Does this suggest that when we have too much knowledge, then we realise that it just requires a little knowledge to give us power?
1)The first argument would be how the knowledge itself is power. As long as we have the knowledge about something although it is "little", we will get the power- the ability to do something. So it is fascinating that just by having a certain knowledge , we are being recognised as someone with power. So, does it mean that every single human being have power???
To what extent people can get the power from the knowledge given. Is there any limit for people to obtain the power from the knowledge presented to them. TO WHAT EXTENT !!!. If that the case, does the limit or the boundary on getting knowledge at last depends on the human capability in deciphering the knowledge. For instance, some people are presented with the same knowledge like others, however due to certain factors like age and gender, they do not get the power as they supposed to.
Are knowledge itself is being selective in giving people power. Or only selected people. Bias of knowledge?? Thus, we can conclude that not all knowledge although the amount is too little or too much, it sill can't give people power as they should.
-
7) I believe that power is actually the ability to do something, to change something. It will not be considered possessing power if we have it but nothing occurs. This also includes the power to have complete control over myself.
8) However, if the knowledge itself is power how is it?? is it always the case for everyone. Does knowledge have the same stand or equal to POWER? is it always the case because it could have been an exception for people who perceive it differently. When they believe that knowledge is actually not power, thus knowledge is not power. Meaning that every time we require new knowledge, power will not be there together with it. Although the knowledge is not power, we can't neglect the fact that it can bring power to people who possess it
9) this will lead to another inquiry from me, how much empowerment would it give to people based on the amount of knowledge. Based on PT, as suggested, it said it is astonishing that little knowledge can give so much power. If little is enough, do people still obligated to obtain more knowledge than its supposed to. Some people do want less empowerment in doing something, thus this indicate there is limit for people in getting knowledge from it. They must tend to ignore the excess of knowledge from it because power is not the first thing they seek for when learning.
6)This PT does not want to discuss just the knowledge only as the word little indicates two things. The first is the amount of the knowledge we perceive and the other one is the simplicity of the knowledge. For instance, a knowledge about subtracting 1 by 1 can be considered as little knowledge. We can easily understand it as this not require a critical thinking
3)The second argument is that little will never be enough for people to be granted with power. This is because even granted with much knowledge, there is nothing to do with power. As the knowledge is not directly linked with power. Being knowledgeable doesn't make you powerful or superior to other person or something. We need other elements too besides knowledge to make a change for ourselves or the society.
Because we define power as something related with action in making changes.... THAT WHY KNOWLEDGE IS NEVER ENOUGH THUS KNOWLEDGE IS NOT EQUAL TO POWER
1) The first AOK that will be discussed in this PT is natural sciences. AS the PT suggested, natural sciences is knowledge that is very close with the scientific investigation
4) Thus, this will conclude that it is not astonishing at all for little knowledge to give us power as it is not the truth. People will not find it amazing as they perceive the power to be associated with something other than knowledge, such as authority and superiority. PEOPLE DO NOT SEE POWER THROUGH KNOWLEDGE ONLY. knowledge would be wasted if there is nothing that we can do with it. To make change, to live in better society, to do a wise decision
2) Hence, this can prove that the discovery found within the research is significant for the scientist to further their research although what they found is too little. As long as it can lead to another findings, it will give them power to do something with it. which is another evolved discovery
3)It is astonishing as they only need little knowledge for it to enhance the probability of the research to be successful for the humanity.
4) For example, biology, new discovery will later save then humanity in the future. The Lemon Frost Geckos, the scientists were astonished on how the species has two different colour of skins. They found out that this geckos have survived with a tumour that has the same gene as human. They believe that this little knowledge could save the human from the Melanoma (skin disease)
We can see exactly how the the knowledge can become a great power for human as we are given the absolute chance to change our medical history. That is the reason why people perceive knowledge itself is power, and it can be granted to all people equally who are seeking to receive the knowledge.
When exactly people started to see knowledge in a new light, knowledge = power ??
This was first quoted by Sir Francis Bacon in (1597), in his work Meditationes Sacrae.
For this long knowledge has been approved by him to be associated with power, it does give significant impact to the knowers nowadays.
MAIN IDEA FROM FRANCIS BACON: having and sharing the knowledge is the cornerstone of reputation and influence, and therefore power, all achievements emanate from this....
How can Sir Francis Bacon's philosophy can be indulged in with the AOK? We know the influence of the knowledge of Gecko to be exist as the saviour for humanity can really rewrite the history itself. Plus, it can billions of people living in this earth just by this new discovery(knowledge).
We can see how far the discovery can give empowerment for people to do some changes related to medical. But to what extent this knowledge can really give the power to researchers to do research???
5) For particular research, they need to repeat the experiment as much as they can as the current knowledge is not enough for them to make a conclusion. Although the too little knowledge is already astonishing due to its power in giving humanity the chance of survival from the disease. BUT THE AMOUNT IS NOT ENOUGH FOR HUMAN TO BE FULLY EMPOWERED WITH THE KNOWLELDGE
-
1) The second AOK is history. This is because the historians are always eager to find the leads regarding human civilisation for instance. It doesn't have to be something big as the enitire humanity or city to be found to make it astonishing. They just want the knowledge to be there. This is because to find it at the first place is difficult for them, "little" means everything for the historians to make predictions and so on
2) Discovery of the nobleman Khuwy, the knowledge will be considered as little as they only found it as a new discovery or new artifact. However, this artifact is actually bringing in a greater knowledge to the archeologist for them to rewrite a new history regarding mummification process. Our history book could be different from what we read because this particular knowledge suggest that there is some faults in our timeline in Egyptian era.