Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

PT 4: Do the ever-improving tools of an area of knowledge always result in…

- - - - Need to discuss the relationship between knowledge and tools. How do we ensure that the improvement in tools lead to improvement in knowledge?
        
        Examples where improvement in tools led to improvement in knowledge
        
        AOK: Natural Sciences
        
        RLE: The Hubble Space Telescope:
        
        Brief explanation of RLE: The development and deployment of the Hubble Space Telescope in 1990 revolutionized our understanding of the universe. Compared to ground-based telescopes, Hubble’s advanced imaging tools allowed astronomers to view distant galaxies, nebulae, and other cosmic phenomena in unprecedented detail.
        
        Impact on knowledge: This improvement in observational tools led to major discoveries, such as confirming the accelerated expansion of the universe, which contributed to the formulation of dark energy theory. Without this tool, many key insights into cosmology would have remained beyond reach.
        
        AOK: History
        
        RLE: Radiocarbon Dating
        
        Brief explanation of RLE Radiocarbon dating (developed in the late 1940s) revolutionized archaeology by allowing historians and archaeologists to accurately determine the age of organic materials. Prior to this, determining the timeline of historical events often involved guesswork. By measuring the decay of carbon-14, researchers can now date artifacts, bones, and historical remains with a high degree of precision.
        
        Impact on knowledge: This tool led to major revisions in historical timelines and contributed to a more accurate understanding of human history and prehistoric cultures.
        
        Examples where improvement in tools did not lead to improvement in knowledge
        
        AOK: Natural Sciences
        
        RLE: Phrenology
        
        Brief explanation of RLE: In the 19th century, phrenology was considered a legitimate science that used ever-improving skull measurement tools to assess personality traits. Phrenologists believed that the bumps on a person's skull could reveal mental faculties and character. As measuring tools became more refined, practitioners were able to make more detailed and precise measurements.
        
        Impact on knowledge: this improvement in tools did not lead to better or accurate knowledge because the underlying theory was flawed. Phrenology was later debunked, demonstrating that more precise tools do not always yield valid or truthful knowledge.
        
        AOK: History: Invasive Archaeological Techniques:
        
        Brief explanation of RLE: In archaeology, early invasive excavation techniques often destroyed significant historical artifacts and stratigraphy (layers of soil and cultural history), despite using better excavation tools. For example, Heinrich Schliemann’s excavation of Troy in the late 19th century employed relatively modern tools and methods at the time.
        
        Impact on knowledge: However, his aggressive excavation destroyed many layers of history, erasing valuable information about earlier civilizations in the process. In this case, more advanced tools did not preserve or improve historical knowledge, and in some instances, they hindered it.
        
        AOK History:
        
        improved tools can create over-reliance on digital sources at the expense of traditional methods
        
        AI algorithms analyzing historical patterns may overlook critical qualitative factors like human emotions, motivations, or cultural nuances, which are essential for understanding certain historical events.
        
        n history, the development of advanced tools like AI-driven historical analysis can lead to an over-reliance on these tools, potentially replacing traditional methods like qualitative analysis, resulting in distorted or superficial interpretations of historical events.
        
        :technological advancements can prioritize certain narratives over others
        
        Advancements in tools used for historical research (e.g., digitization or data mining software) may unintentionally prioritize certain historical narratives or sources that are more accessible, while others (e.g., oral histories, marginalized voices) remain overlooked.
        
        Digital archives allow easy access to colonial records, but oral traditions or non-written sources from indigenous communities remain underrepresented despite the improved archival tools, leading to imbalanced historical knowledge.
        
        ever-improving tools for restoration and preservation may distort the original meaning of artifacts
        
        Hypothesis: As preservation tools improve, historians are able to restore and conserve ancient artifacts and documents with more accuracy. However, this process can inadvertently alter the authenticity or original meaning of these objects, especially if modern preservation techniques introduce materials or methods that differ significantly from historical practice
        
        Example: Ever-improving digital restoration of ancient manuscripts can sometimes alter the original text by removing historical features (such as ink stains or annotations) that were part of the artifact’s historical context, leading to a loss in the understanding of the document’s original usage.
        
        AOK: Natural Sciences
        
        tools can amplify anomalies without improving underlying knowledge:
        
        Improvements in scientific tools, such as more sensitive measuring devices, may detect anomalies that are difficult to interpret, leading to more confusion or debate rather than clear progress in knowledge.
        
        The detection of gravitational waves opened new avenues for exploration, but many anomalies detected in cosmic data through improved tools have not led to definitive explanations, thus creating more theoretical challenges than answers.
        
        better tools lead to data accumulation but not necessarily theoretical breakthroughs
        
        Hypothesis: In natural sciences, improved tools often allow for more data collection, but the sheer volume of new data may overwhelm scientists or create challenges in theoretical interpretation. Breakthroughs in understanding still depend on paradigm shifts in theory.
        
        Example: The discovery of the genome through better sequencing tools created huge amounts of genetic data, but fully understanding the complexity of gene expression and interactions remains elusive.
        
        improved tools can outpace ethical considerations, limiting knowledge
        
        Hypothesis: In natural sciences, the rapid improvement in tools (e.g., CRISPR gene editing) can sometimes move faster than ethical frameworks, creating moral dilemmas that slow down or restrict the generation of new knowledge until ethical questions are resolved.
        
        Example: While CRISPR allows for precise gene editing, the ethical debates about its use in human embryos have hindered progress in research, thus limiting the application of new knowledge.
        
        ever-improving observational tools can create gaps between data and theory:
        
        As tools for observation, such as telescopes or microscopes, improve over time, they can generate unprecedented amounts of data that may outpace existing theoretical frameworks. While these tools can help collect more detailed observations, they may also highlight gaps in scientists’ understanding, complicating the ability to make coherent knowledge claims.
        
        Example: The James Webb Space Telescope represents an ever-improving tool for observing distant galaxies and cosmic phenomena, but the observations of early galaxies contradict current cosmological models, leaving gaps in knowledge despite the improved observational power.
        
        ever-improving tools may lead to diminishing returns in knowledge generation
        
        Hypothesis: While scientific instruments, such as microscopes or telescopes, have become more precise and advanced, these ever-improving tools may reach a point where they provide more data without necessarily yielding new understanding or breakthroughs. Scientists can face the challenge of diminishing returns, where increasing precision does not always equate to deeper insights.
        
        Example: Particle accelerators like the Large Hadron Collider are ever-improving in their ability to detect smaller particles, but after the discovery of the Higgs boson, further findings have been limited, suggesting that advancements in tools don’t always result in proportionate improvements in theoretical knowledge.
        
        ever-improving tools might expose more questions than they answer:
        
        Hypothesis: In the natural sciences, tools such as genome sequencing have improved dramatically, allowing scientists to gather more intricate details about genetic information. However, the ever-increasing complexity of the data can lead to new uncertainties or questions that slow down the development of clear, actionable knowledge.
        
        Example: The improvement in tools for gene editing, such as CRISPR, has provided detailed control over genetic manipulation. But it has also raised significant ethical and theoretical questions that limit how much we can truly act on this new knowledge. The improvements in tools highlight the complexity of gene functions, making the knowledge more elusive rather than more accessible.
- - - - ever-improving constitutes that there are improvements in tools and that they are continously improved over time
      - Why is it problematic? Because there are a lot of metrics to investigate improvements with varying levels of accuracy and reliablity. Context matters
      - There are many variations of tools.
      - Implications for tools
        
        Environmentally sustainable
        
        If so, is a ship an improvement over a sail boat
        
        More revelatory, illuminating, & meaningful
        
        Is watching a cat video on tiktok an improvements over ancient texts that have shaped society, cultures, religions and countries
  - - - Tools can include:
        
        Physical technology
        
        bicycles, guns, microscopes, books
        
        Methodological processes
        
        Scientific methods
        
        Conceptual tools
        
        Economic graphs
        
        Concepts
        
        blackholes & wormholes
      - Try to expand beyond the linear tech argument. i.e newer tools = better version. For example, cars are an improvement of horses and bikes
      - Improvements in tools
        
        Does improvement in functionality capacity of a tool? = the only improvement for a tool?
        
        Improvements in functionality. i.e more efficient, or better example: Cars are an improvement of bikes in terms of ability to travel long distances
        
        Improvements in functionality capacity of a tool
        
        Not that straightforward
        
        Simple argument: A gas powered car is better than a horse, because it can travel long distances better
        
        Diff pov: A gas powered car is useless is a rough terrain argument like the grand canyon whereby a horse would be better suited
        
        Improvements in ethics. Tools are more ethical
        
        Improvements in sustainability. It affects the environment less. Ex: Electric cars are an improveme
        
        Can we only measure improvements by comparison?
- - - - Evaluation
        
        The claim only takes into account of ever-improving tools in physical technology