What Is The Value Of Knowledge

1517 Words7 Pages

I remember observing a deaf child uttering their first word and reflecting on the extreme effort it appeared to take, and the unbounded joy exhibited on the faces of his parents. Were my parents any less overjoyed with my first (seemingly effortless) use of spoken language? The knowledge question implies that the value of knowledge is dependent on the level of difficulty in producing it. I believe that the production of anything new requires a degree of effort. However, to quantify the effort and equate it to value, whether personal or shared, is subject to inherent bias as our different perspectives influence our assessments (value judgements) and assertions (factual statements). I can appreciate that it may appear reasonable to quantify …show more content…

However, as humans and societies are constantly evolving, the behavioural patterns that are observed fluctuate over time. Although the knowledge produced is generated through an agreed knowledge framework, the theories established in the Human Sciences are not always clearly defined but are more often proposed using generalisations and trends. The value of knowledge produced is also subject to change, depending on the historical context. For example, within psychology the “Nature vs Nurture” debate, explores whether human development is inherent or influenced by the environment. During the 20th century, there was controversy regarding this debate between two anthropologists; Margaret Mead and Derek Freeman. Both anthropologists produced knowledge on teenage sexuality by observing a ‘primitive’ Samoan tribe, however, Mead’s findings on cultural influences (published in 1928) were proved flawed when verified by Freeman (published in 1983). Although Mead’s conclusions lobbied a new way of thinking and broke new ground within shared knowledge, her theories were only considered valuable during the time they were published. However, each scientist’s findings may have been distorted by inherent bias as well as influenced by different points in, as Freeman’s research was carried out 55 years after Mead’s. Perhaps in this example, it is evident that even though knowledge may be …show more content…

However, in my view, this overlooks other ways of learning that can considered equally valuable. Faith is a way of knowing that does not use scientific data to validate a belief or claim. In other words, faith is a concept that does not necessarily require concrete evidence in order for the knowledge to be truly valued by people. Since early civilisation, we have seen how faith and spiritual belief has influenced human behaviour in societies and influenced shared knowledge. For instance, Native Americans believed in spirits known as “Wakan Tanka”, thought to control the world around them and cause natural incidents such as floods. Subsequently, people used this knowledge to guide their behaviour believing it to have value. Even though today, the Natural Sciences have provided explanations for natural phenomena, faith in “Wakan Tanka” was a subjective commitment that enforced a universally shared agreement believed to be truly valuable. While it could be argued that ‘blind faith’ is easily produced and therefore should not be truly valued, faith can nonetheless contribute to our cultural identity by influencing a strong sense of belonging and thereby be considered as valuable for human interaction and peace of

Open Document