Confusion Cost Of Knowledge

Just as knowledge is often divided into different disciplines, the separation between my classes is equally prominent: I have humanities in the morning and sciences in the afternoon. Culturally, I have been taught to compartmentalize knowledge by discipline, but could this be problematic not only to learning but to the production of knowledge? If classes were mixed or combined, would the comparison between different methodology and values lead to a better understanding and innovative approaches? Or would it make comprehension of a particular subject impossible and impede the production of knowledge? Even though adopting interdisciplinary approaches between some disciplines seems impractical, other disciplines inherently seem to have virtue

This led to the question: To what extent is confusion valuable to the production of knowledge? If “confusion” is defined as the lack of knowledge, then it is logical that confusion is the natural result of contradictory information. Scientific discovery is often spawned by confusion in the form of unanswered questions which can lead to the formation of new, oftentimes opposing theories. If a newer theory is supported and better explains a given phenomenon what results is called a paradigm shift. Thus, from confusion, a better model is created which supports the production of more knowledge. Likewise, in Mathematics uncertainty can be seen in how knowledge is produced. As in science, a mathematical theory is a verifiable explanation, but only if it can be definitely proven true using mathematics, it can become a law, which can be used in the production of more theories. In Art, confusion emerges from the differences between interpretations and methods, not too unlike opposing theories. However, in the arts, knowledge is not produced from the acceptance of one theory and the dismissal of the other, but the discussion which emerges as a result of confusion. Literature has a specific term for the confusion that emerges as a result of contradictory information: a paradox. However, even in language, complications between academic disciplines arise. In literature, a paradox is

Even though most people are comfortable with scientific concepts and literature occasionally overlapping, as they do in science fiction, these works reveal different truths in different disciplines. To a scientific community, science fiction shows a future possibility, such as the idea of an electric submarine, as Jules Verne describes in 20,000 Leagues under the Sea, while in literary communities, the genre can be used to reveal basic human truths. It is easy to differentiate science and art; to call art subjective and science objective; to say that art is produced through emotion and intuition, while science uses reason. On the other hand, even though mathematics and the natural sciences are often accepted in combination with each other, fundamentally the processes of obtaining knowledge are equally different. Compared to mathematics which obtains knowledge purely through rationalism, the natural sciences are empirical. Still, the different academic fields work well in conjunction. In Biology, scientists use statistics such as the Chi-Squared Test, to determine if their data shows a conclusive relationship and in Physics applied mathematics is