• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

If facts themselves never prove or disprove anything, what else is involved in the proof of a statement?"

Extracts from this document...


"If facts themselves never prove or disprove anything, what else is involved in the proof of a statement?" Answer with reference to at least two Areas of Knowledge. The title assumes facts themselves never prove or disprove anything. I will show that this two-part assumption is incorrect. I believe facts can disprove incorrect propositions, but that they can not, by themselves, prove anything. I contend that proof is no more than adequate grounds for the acceptance of the proposition; admittedly, what counts as adequate and acceptable changes from one area of knowledge to another. Further, my position is that facts add to only one aspect of what we will consider as "proof", namely providing evidence for justifying ones knowledge. To prove a statement, in its purest sense, means to provide unshakable, undeniable and irrefutable grounds for the acceptance of the claim. Proof of a proposition, to this standard, is unobtainable in all areas of knowledge except mathematics (Bostock et al, 1982). If we stick literally to this meaning of proof we would need to restrict our discussions to mathematics alone. This would be impossible as the title requires investigation into at least two areas of knowledge. I am therefore forced into pulling back from the rigorous, demanding requirements of proof in the mathematical sense, and instead adopt, for the purpose of this essay, a less exacting definition. ...read more.


Ghosts do not exist. The reason for pointing out these examples is that "facts" can only be reliably used to investigate a statement if they are actually facts. Wrong facts do not exist, but things we think are facts, but turn out to be false certainly can exist, and have done so in the past. What can and can not be proved with facts, and if facts by themselves are inadequate, what else is involved? A fact is simply a true statement. If presented with a fact I would know no more than, "this statement is true". For example, the fact that Washington is the capital of the USA is simply a true statement. It tells me nothing other than Washington is the capital of the USA. No further knowledge can be gleaned from the fact. I do not even have to alter my beliefs based on the statement, but to do so on no evidence, save perhaps the claim of the person presenting me with the fact, is to take a tremendous leap of faith. We all know Washington is the capital of the USA, but what if I presented you with the "fact" that I share my birthday with Jill, a girl I went to school with. ...read more.


In mathematics, a new theorem is not based on a fact. I would even say that there are no facts in mathematics. Facts are always true. Mathematical statements are 100% certain, true if you wish, provided you accept the axioms. There is no such proviso for facts in other disciplines. A scientific fact does not require the pre-acceptance of gravitation. An historical fact does not require the assumption France and Prussia were at war. So, in mathematics, the 100% certainty in facts, e.g. 1+1=2, depends upon a more fundamental supposition: the acceptance, without question, of the axioms of arithmetic. If such a pre-requisite exists in all of mathematics, and all of modern mathematics is axiomatic, then how can mathematical facts exist independently of other conditions? Facts are just true; they do not require other assumptions. As such, mathematics contains no facts. In mathematics all true statements ultimately depend upon an acceptance of unprovable axioms. With the inclusion of deductive reasoning, new theorems arise from previously proved statements or from the axioms. In conclusion, knowledge is justified, true belief. Facts, which are true statements, can only help in justifying a knowledge claim; they are insufficient to establish the claim as knowledge. However, a single fact, along with a certain amount of logical reasoning, can disprove an incorrect statement. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge essays

  1. Science is built of facts the way a house is built of bricks: but ...

    Despite the sources of knowledge therefore being less reliable as a matter of obtaining results and formulating them, the social sciences are in some circumstances of more use in the real world that those from the natural sciences.

  2. What are the differences between "I am certain" and "it is certain", and is ...

    Logic and emotion seem to contradict themselves in some occasions (as illustrate above in terms of subjectivity and objectivity), and both of them are as equally important as the other in many cases. The above examples, however, only proved that both are important when trying to explain knowledge, but we

  1. TOk Discussion - Do we impose mathematics upon nature or is it naturally inherent ...

    Not only would that be visually awesome, it could provide an answer to using solar panels as a main source of energy. Mathematics and nature is all around us, so putting them together in design would make something incredible. A: Although we have discussed at length about mathematics, and how

  2. If facts by themselves never prove or disprove anything, what else is involved in ...

    That is technically correct, for example, H20 (liquid) does equal to H20 (solid), however, by asking any reasonable person that "is ice and water the same thing?" a normal person would say no. The reason being that ice is usually used to cool substances, and water is normally used to drink.

  1. The Edge of Dreaming

    If someone were to give me a good argument about the separation of the body, mind and spirit then I would consider it. The movie made some good points on thinks about dreams and what not, but it did not really change any way of my thinking.

  2. work based project

    I conducted some research on exercise and the benefit it could have for mental health patients. I discovered that people with severe and enduring mental illnesses such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are at an 'increased risk of a range of physical illnesses and conditions, including coronary heart disease, diabetes,

  1. TOK How do these considerations (of age, identity) play a role in convictions? Are ...

    To reconstruct the past event, Dr. Hurst used all available information and performed scientific tests. At first, he examined and analyzed Vasquez?s testimony, a floor of plan of the house and photos of the front porch taken before the fire where a charcoal grill was sitting.

  2. Justification, what distinguishes a good justification from a bad one?

    Another thing that is required when it comes to using reason or the other ways of knowing is coherence. You should make sure that your belief and the evidence that justifies it ?fit in? with the current understanding of things.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work