Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
PT 2: Is our most revered knowledge more fragile than we assume it to be? …
PT 2: Is our most revered knowledge more fragile than we assume it to be?
Keyword
Fragile
synonym
Vulnerable
Weak
Unstable
Delicate
Definition: Something that is easily broken, damaged, or vulnerable
analysis
more likely to change
uncertain
easy to erode
can be argued
vulnerable
raising questions
does fragile means that the knowledge has no solid proof supporting it?
does everyone’s degree of measuring fragile the same?
are all forms of knowledge equally fragile?
can fragility be measured or quantified?
does the period of time expose the fragility of knowledge?
Assume
synonym
Presume
Believe
Expect
Definition: To accept something as true without question or proof.
analysis
only theoretically
something is taken for granted or accepted without question
create a gap between assumption and reality
believing something is true/ false without proof
unexamined beielfs
accept the fact
raising questions
how to differentiate between assuming and knowing?
How do assumptions about strength of knowledge affect our approach of preserving it?
does our assumption influenced by the people close to us?
can we make an assumption without any proof?
what make us assume certain knowledge is stable?
Where does assumption lead us to?
revered knowledge
synonym
Admired
Honored
esteemed
Respected
Definition: Knowledge that is deeply respected, admired, or held in high regard
analysis
usually considered sacred or divine
deep respect/admire
usually comes from authorities figures and institutions
wisdom that is highly valued
foundation for belief system
held with honor/high regard
to show devotion
remain influential in a long time
raising question
does people from the same community subjected to the same revered knowledge?
is revered knowledge universally understood or does it vary across cultures?
how does one's revered knowledge differ from another?
is it possible for an individual to not have any revered knowledge of their own?
does people from the same community subjected to the same revered knowledge?
can revered knowledge be re-evaluated without losing its revered status?
how do one establish a knowledge is regarded as revered?
assumption of PT
is revered knowledge biased towards one's opinion?
does it mean we are biased to our revered knowledge when we defend it from people who challenged it?
does the addition of new evidences would affect our stance on our most revered knowledge?
does the addition of new evidences would affect our stance on our most revered knowledge?
is our reference for certain knowledge based on tradition rather than its actual reliability or truth?
Could the rapid pace of change in our modern world render some of our most revered knowledge obsolete or irrelevant more quickly than we expect?
could the loss of expertise in their field threaten the preservation of our revered knowledge?
Is the revered knowledge itself fragile, or is it the connection to the knowledge that is fragile?
Does revered knowledge remain static, or is it subject to evolution and reinterpretation?
Do institutionalised methods make revered knowledge less fragile, or do they mask its vulnerability?
argument
argument against
Most revered knowledge can be reinterpreted to new context, ensuring its continued relevance.
As long as there are people or institutions dedicated to preserving and upholding it, revered knowledge can remain strong and influential.
specialised experts work to preserve and expend the knowledge in their field
written records that has ben preserved protect knowledge from losing over time
There must be a reason why an individual regard a certain knowledge as 'revered' knowledge
argument for
sometimes we just accept the knowledge without the questioning it cause it's been along for a long time
knowledge may be intentionally influenced by political factors
it may be influenced by cultural or social bias
scientific theories always change constantly based on recent discoveries
knowledge is rely heavily on methods and tools avaible for discovery
chosen AOK
arts
Does the shifting nature of artistic movements and styles show that revered artistic knowledge is fragile?
How does cultural context affect the perceived stability of knowledge in the arts?
In what ways does the interpretation of art reflect the fragility of knowledge about its meaning?
Does the subjectivity of art interpretation make knowledge in the arts inherently fragile?
In what ways do shifts in cultural values challenge the stability of what is considered 'revered' knowledge in the arts?
Does the evolving nature of artistic technique (e.g., from realism to abstract art) demonstrate the fragility of technical knowledge in the arts?
How do changing societal norms impact the perception of revered works of art?
natural science
To what extent do paradigm shifts in science reflect the fragility of revered knowledge?
Can scientific knowledge be considered fragile if it relies on reproducibility and empirical validation?
How reliable are scientific theories in the face of new evidence or technological advancements?
How does the peer review process in science both strengthen and expose the fragility of scientific knowledge?
How do uncertainties in scientific models (e.g, climate models) reflect the potential fragility of highly respected knowledge?
Is the reliability of scientific knowledge dependent on the limitations of human perception and technology?
To what extent does the reproducibility crisis in science challenge the assumption that scientific knowledge is robust?