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

One definition of knowledge is true belief based on strong evidence. What makes evidence "strong" enough and how can this be established especially through perception?

Extracts from this document...


One definition of knowledge is true belief based on strong evidence. What makes evidence "strong" enough and how can this be established especially through perception? Knowledge is created when one follows the method of reinforcing the reliability of pragmatic evidence. Regardless of what is deemed true and untrue in the world, people's opinions differ when distinguishing fact from fiction, and there have been endless debates when it comes to deciphering one from the other. Evidence is a vital element required to justify truth, as solid evidence cannot be argued against as it gives us facts through our empirical perceptions. The amount of evidence required to prove something is true also differs from topic to topic, with major topics requiring solid evidence include scientific investigations, historical assessments and judicial examinations. As human civilization has developed, so has the significance of evidence as our view of the world has acquired a more scientific view rather than an empirical view of judging something on how it appears to be. Using evidence as a strong basis of eliminating fallacious perceptions is also affected when taking into account the type of evidence which is at hand. People have debated where to mark the line between valuable and unreliable truth since the truth seekers of the earliest times to the present day. ...read more.


Expert and authority testimony can both be viewed as dubious evidence under the support of trust. Candidly, trust may strengthen controversial evidence, but I believe there are still large gaps of reasonable doubts that this kind of evidence does not cover. Forced to bend the line that I have already begun to draw, I rotate the direction of my thoughts towards the field of science. Distinguished by their consistent approach to knowledge, the science sociality always seem to strive for the most solid and authentic evidence to justify their theories. Trying to uncover the origin of its popularity, I found myself examining science's fundamental scheme of acquiring evidence � the scientific method. The overwhelming success that scientific evidence has obtained in the justification of truth is, in my belief, the result of rational reasoning and empirical testing. The linkage of evidence and hypothesis in a scientific experiment are always restricted by rigorous rules, so that all facts, or evidence, must be logically relevant to the experimentation. A good example of this would be: the controlled experiment, where a monitored environment prevents the incorporation of unrelated article that could jeopardize the precision of the outcome. However, with all the technical jargon and concepts that is sometimes grasped by so few, why do the public still trust the intricate scientific proofs that almost seem mystical? ...read more.


Like I have stated before, at the time of the trail, scientific evidence was overwhelmingly popular, because it is more compelling. However, the prosecutors were unaware that forensic science can be a double-edged sword. While most convincing evidence are strong evidence, we cannot neglect the fact that, not all of them can cover up every area of doubt. "Every addition [of evidence] opens up one more potential defense loophole." Evans' view, to me is very rational. Because we cannot re-act every part of history, and human technology can not find every exact point in the universe, finding the perfect and indubitable evidence is just too infrequent. This imperfection of evidence can only be minimized, but cannot be eliminate, this eventually will result in few controversies. As we find better ways of finding stronger knowledge, the frequency of the controversies will also decrease. Subsequently, I believe, relevance, authenticity, objectivity and creditability are all strong factors in the acquirement of strong evidence, which ultimately affects the validation of knowledge. With different situation and within different fields of study, the degree of these four factors that determines strong evidence may vary, because of the difference in how truth is viewed. In this essay, I have presented my own view and draw my own line which may incorporate my own personal predisposition, but I believe, parts of my mark will still remain on that spectrum as genuine knowledge. ...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. How can different ways of knowing help us to distinguish between something that is ...

    People give their own reasons to justify their opinion or their habits, which change what is true. Moreover, everything created for a specific reason. Kids tend to learn not to touch the electric heated again after they try it. Also there are relationship between religions and reason.

  2. Which is the more important attribute of the historian: the ability to analyse evidence ...

    used them both in order to come up with a more solid conclusion, as an example of this there was a well known scientist called Copernicus, that said " the earth moves around the sun, not vice versa", in order to reach this hypothesis he had to use both scientific analysis and develop his creative interpretation.

  1. One definition of knowledge is true belief based on strong evidence. What makes evidence ...

    All mathematicians would agree on mathematical knowledge and mathematics is quickly finding its way into other Areas of Knowledge due to its reliability. In natural sciences however, things are different. The laws in natural sciences are not as certain as mathematics, where proof is concrete, rationalized, unchangeable and are based are on axioms-obvious and definite truths.

  2. TOK notes. The problem of knowledge There are three ...

    kind of argument that includes: Two premises and a conclusion Three terms, each occurring twice Quantifiers (all, some, no) Truth = a property of statements Validity = a property of arguments An argument is valid if the conclusion follows logically from the premises and invalid when it doesn't.

  1. The Law of the Universe: Entropy

    case: returning to my original example namely one plus one equals two, so far one plus one has always equalled two based on our logic and our empirical investigations that we can assume that entropy will always remain flowing from low to high: an event would have to take place

  2. ToK presentation

    This is a very scary thought and would frighten humanity as it gives us the feeling of helplessness, as there is nothing we do can delay or avoid this future. However, if this theory didn't have a big emphasis on fact then it would have been completely forgotten and disregarded long ago.

  1. How can the different ways of knowing help us to distinguish between something that ...

    In science we also use senses when making observation which are then used to make theories. For example in chemistry a exothermic reaction always give out heat and therefore when we touch a beaker and feel that it?s hot we will know that it was an exothermic reaction also I

  2. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. (Christopher Hitchens). ...

    No one dismissed these claims basically because it suited them. One might then raise the knowledge issue whether a knower dismisses or accepts assertions because of the evidence or because of convenience. As far as the Human Sciences are concerned, evidence is not always to be found.

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