Difference of Truth and knowldge
What are the differences between “I am certain” and “it is certain”, and is passionate conviction ever sufficient for justifying knowledge? Two men are standing in the street, one looks at the other and says, “If I flip this coin an equal number of times, I am certain I will always achieve identical numbers of both heads and tails.” He proceeds with flipping the coin ten times, only achieving two heads and eight tails. This man was certain he would achieve equal numbers of heads and tails, as the theoretical probability of the problem was fifty-fifty. On the other hand, it is certain that the results are random, as the coin could land on either side an infinite amount of times. Here we see one of many major differences between the phrase “I am certain” and “it is certain”. “It is certain” relates to facts, research, scientific experiment and induction, empirical evidence, mathematics and proof. “It is certain” is usually a statement of truth and authority. It is an idea or statement that is backed up by facts, such as taking two apples and placing them in a bag with five more, and deducing the statement “It is certain two plus five is seven” as seven apples now occupy the bag. “I am certain” falls under the category of reason and logic as a way of knowing. While the phrase “it is certain” is usually accepted as a statement of truth, “I am certain” is a more personal statement and so depends more on one’s cultural background. It may be more closely linked to the category of emotion and perception as a way of knowing and, in general, be affected by human experience and therefore may differ from person to person. These two phrases, however, are commonly misused. One could say “It is certain” when one should be using “I am certain”, as the statement is not backed up by any form of reliable evidence. I once knew a child who believed the clouds moved because he pushed them with his mind. His only proof was that whenever he looked towards the sky he saw them moving, not realising they were merely being blown by gusts of wind. He developed his conclusion from empirical evidence, using his senses and inducing a theory. The child used the phrase “It is certain” when he actually meant “I am certain”, as although his own evidence supported his theory, it was in fact false. It is difficult in everyday life to determine the differences between the sayings, as they are continuously often misused. Passionate conviction, the utter belief that something is true, can be used in some situations to justify knowledge. For example, a person can believe in ghosts due to a past paranormal experience, even though there is no evidence to strongly prove the existence of such beings. They are certain they saw a ghost, and to them that is enough
to justify their knowledge that ghosts exist. It relates mainly to the statement “I am certain” and is therefore a form of emotion as a way of knowing. Passionate conviction can be used in the arts, sciences, and history as well ethics as a form of justification. The only area of knowledge where it cannot be used to any extent is mathematics. Many people would argue that in the Arts one cannot say, “It is certain this is a wonderful piece of art” as everyone’s perception is different and that passionate conviction can be used to justify a person’s feelings ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
to justify their knowledge that ghosts exist. It relates mainly to the statement “I am certain” and is therefore a form of emotion as a way of knowing. Passionate conviction can be used in the arts, sciences, and history as well ethics as a form of justification. The only area of knowledge where it cannot be used to any extent is mathematics. Many people would argue that in the Arts one cannot say, “It is certain this is a wonderful piece of art” as everyone’s perception is different and that passionate conviction can be used to justify a person’s feelings towards the artwork, as art is perceived in different ways depending on the person. However, this is a feeble attempt to try and explain the Arts.. If However, if an piece of artartwork is perceived as beautiful for hundreds of yearscenturies, this gives a strong support to the view that it is truly beautiful, at the very least for a significant number of people over a long period of time. For example, the works of Shakespeare, therefore, has have lasted through time and has have proved its their durability. Shakespeare’s work is also more highly regarded than that by, say, Jeffrey Archer as he perfected his craft. It also contains elements of truth about human nature, it has a multiplicity of interpretations and is valued because it has contributed to a particular culture. The beautiful use of language and imagery in Othello, the themes of jealousy and love, and the idea of betrayal are all relevant today, and, most likely, always will be. Shakespeare’s work and other “beautiful” pieces of art are considered so because of craftsmanship , durability and because they contain certain elements of truth that can be related to human nature and society as a whole. “It is certain this piece is beautiful”, therefore, can be used to describe a piece of artwork that has weathered the trials of time, was crafted with great detail and relates to our world no matter the year. Overall, passionate conviction can be used within the Arts, but certain pieces of work can also be related to the phrase “It is certain”. Passionate conviction is the main basis behind a person’s morals and ethics. There are few that are accepted world wide, as they depend highly on culture, background and experience as well as emotion. It is, therefore, in most cases impossible to say “It is certain” that a specific action is wrong or right. For example, last summer a group of friends and myself were hiking across the Island of Skye with an adventure organisation when one became severely ill and needed to be airlifted out. As the helicopter began its descent one of the boys took out his camera to take some pictures. To him this was perfectly right, but to me it was for the wrong reason. It is like taking pictures of ambulances attending a car crash; some people see it as perfectly normal (such as tourists to the area) but others consider it wrong. I could argue that “I am certain” taking a photograph of an ambulance in action is morally wrong, but would find little basis for the use of the statement “It is certain”. Passionate conviction and the statement “I am certain”, therefore, can be used to justify a person’s morals, as they are truly the basis for each one. However, one could also argue that the statement “It is certain” can be used in certain circumstances, such as if there is a law or rule against a certain action, then said action is wrong as it breaks the rule. However, iIt is difficult to relate the statement to whether something is ethically wrong or right, as ethics and morals are a result of religion, culture and background, and therefore tend to vary from place to place and person to person. Therefore, when it comes to ethics ethics as an area of knowledge, passionate conviction can be used and it relates strongly to the statement “I am certain”. Whilst one traditionally thinks of science as objective and unemotional, passionate conviction is actually a key step in the development of theories and laws. The most widely accepted scientific method is as follows – a hypothesis is created, both controlled and independent variables are identified, the hypothesis is tested and the results are then analysed. After this final step the hypothesis is modified and retested, and the process continues until a theory is created. Passionate conviction comes in at both the beginning when the hypothesis is created, but also at the end when a scientist is convinced that the results came out as they did for whatever reason and attempts to show the scientific world that he is correct. It is only when the theory is challenged by the scientific community and they cannot disprove it that it becomes a “law”. A law is considered “the truth” until it is shown to be false, which is still possible. This is where passionate conviction disappears, and the statement “It is certain” emerges. One could consider this as a pathway – passionate conviction to “I am certain” to “it is certain” to “the truth”. Early scientists believed everything consisted of four elements – earth, air, fire and water. Whenever they burnt somethingBurning something produced they saw fire escaping and earth being left behind and eIf a person complained of expelling large amounts of intestinal gas, the scientists would give them earth to balance out the problem. xcessive gas was caused by too little internal earth. Over time scientists realised that there must be more than four elements, and began to carry out large amounts of research, dispelling the old theories resulting in a present list of 116 elements, ranging from actinium to zirconium. The theory was challenged, disproved and modified. When a theory cannot be disproved, it becomes “a law” which is considered “the truth” until it is shown to be false, which is still possible. This is where passionate conviction disappears, and the statement “It is certain” emerges. One could consider this as a pathway – passionate conviction to “I am certain” to “it is certain” to “the truth”. Some people argue, however, that there are too many problems with the scientific method to consider it any more than passionate conviction. The first occurs in the use of sensory observation. Our auditory, taste, tactile, visual and olfactory senses are usually indivisible from what we think or believe we are hearing, tasting, feeling, seeing or smelling. In general, our senses cannot be trusted absolutely. If one were to takeFor example, a straight a pencil and dip it pencil in a glass of water , the pencil appears bent. The pencil is, in fact, not bent but only wet. In general, our senses cannot be trusted absolutely.The next factor is known as the “observation statement”, where observations have to be described through language. In an experiment with alkynes a chemist may state “x smells of apples”. Now there are numerous problems with this. First of all,But what does an apple smell like? Is he talking about a Golden Delicious or a Granny Smith? Does he mean a whole apple, or a cut apple? To me different apples smell of different thingshave different smells. The final factor affecting observation is what is actually being observed. that Sscientists themselves are human, they and may select what they want to observebe influenced by external factors in what they believe they have observed. This could be due to restrictions put on by the schools they work at, the amount of money the experiment will cost, what the government wants, what the public wants and more. A scientist can say, “I am certain that eating chocolate will reduce the chance of heart disease.” He may be saying so because of an anomaly gained in his experiment, or maybe because the mice he was testing on don’t digest chocolate. Even though a person can reach a conclusion through experiments and research, that conclusion is not necessarily correct. Science, in my opinion, attempts to understand why things happen the way they do and as a result theories are constantly changing. It is almost impossible to prove a theory in science, as they are just that, theories. Therefore passionate conviction and the statement “I am certain” are key in the scientific method and the area of knowledge as a whole. In history passionate conviction can sometimes be used to justify knowledge. History, like science, mainly depends on theories which are highly affected by the person who creates them and how they develop their ideas. When it comes to facts, such as the date someone died, passionate conviction cannot be used. For example a person could be 100% sure that Winston Churchill died in 1945 when he actually died on the 24th of January 1965. This is, therefore, an example of how passionate conviction cannot be used to validate knowledge. However, when dealing with the ideas and theories developed by historians it is more likely that passionate conviction can be used to justify a person’s knowledge. My history teacher has a certain view on the Cold War and believes it was started by country X, while others believe country Y was the initiator. The statement “I am certain country X started the Cold War because…” is an example of a passionate conviction, and if backed by facts and reasonable arguments it may be convincing. However, it is still a theory. History, like science, mainly depends on theories which are highly affected by the person who creates them and how they develop their ideas. The two areas of history, as mentioned, differ.. The cClear facts, such as the date of the inauguration of John F Kennedy into the Oval OfficePresident Kennedy, cannot be attacked by an idea justified by passionate conviction. However, when it comes to determining the date Stalin came to power, it is almost impossible to use anything but passionate conviction (as well as evidence to backup your statement). In an area such as mathematics where things are proven using equations, experiments and more, one cannot say that such knowledge can be justified using passionate conviction. Unless a person can provide mathematical proof to support their arguments then the statement “I am certain…” cannot be used as ato validation validate of knowledge. A mathematical proof has tomust be accepted by a large majority of people to be useful in supporting a statement. Using and repeating numerous steps and finding the idea works in multiple situations is the general idea of mathematical proof. If one is certain that they have the answer to y=x they will generally have to prove it before it is accepted as true. However, once it is proven in a number of ways understandable by others, one can then say “it is certain y=x”. Most mathematical ideas were developed thousands of years ago, and have been tried and tested since. Unlike other areas where ideas and theories are constantly changing, mathematics has remained relatively the same, and is therefore the only area of knowledge where passionate conviction can hardly ever be used to justify knowledge. Overall, “it is certain” is an example of reason and logic, where as “I am certain” is an emotion which relies on one’s upbringing. Passionate conviction is used as the main justification of knowledge in the arts and in ethics, but in other areas such as history and science passionate conviction plays only a part in the validation of knowledge. In mathematics, passionate conviction fails to be useful to any extent. In conclusion, passionate conviction can be sufficient to justify knowledge in certain areas, but inadequate in others.
