It is arguable that almost every theory we have come up with is false. It has the possibility to not be true because it is a theory - a speculation of nature using the facts present. Therefore, we cannot know that which is based off of speculation and assumption. When coming up with our own provisions for knowledge and fact, it is necessary to use a logical cognitive process; else our final product will be erroneous. Illogical thinking leads to illogical outcomes. Though our man-made theories may seem to hold predictive power, they may require the occasional exception. And, as Stephen Hawking’s best puts it, “No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory.”
Human nature is very fond of filling in gaps of knowledge and placing pieces of a puzzle into places they may not fit into. Although it may seem rational to us at first, considering it is our nature, this predilection is a dangerous one that can lead us astray from the truth or deny us the chance to seek it out. For example, in Twelve Angry Men, only one juror out of twelve decided that the suspect of the crime had a possibility of not being guilty from the seemingly sound, but questionable evidence given. This desire, which manifested itself in eleven of the twelve jurors, the eighth juror being the exception, to turn inferences into the truth, otherwise known as knowledge, could have led to the death of an innocent adolescent.
In the movie, it was not fully known whether the accused was guilty, hence the elongated argument that took place. The eighth juror, using possibility, logic, and valid statements, put aside emotional biases, unlike the third and fifth jurors - who identified the suspect with his own son and had compassion for the convict because of his origins respectively - and worked towards creating a theory that best described the situation. This theory stated that the boy, according to the information provided, could not have killed his father. As juror number eight indicated many times, this wasn’t the absolute truth, because none of the jurors or witnesses were able to properly experience the scene of the murder. But, the way he thought about things and came to conclusions showed that the best possibility was the one his theory created. Once again, the importance of events not being able to be observed takes away the ability to know them, but it should not be labeled as completely unknown – hypotheses and theories should not be shot down so quickly if they are the best explanations one can provide.
Another aspect of the ability to know that which we have not experienced is the opposite position. One might say that if all we have to work with leads us to a conclusion, the immediate conclusion must be accepted as fact or knowledge before any new information can change it into something completely different. Additionally, they might maintain that when assuming situations that are inferred or deduced are completely false, a sense of chaos emerges in relation to the validity and reliability of our knowledge base. Although this may sound like a logical argument, it is not valid. In the movie, if the original conclusion was accepted as fact, the wrongly accused would have suffered for no reason. This method would not have proven to have the best predictive and explanatory power. Again, one does not have to say that every theory IS wrong. The viewpoint only says that our final culmination of thinking should be one that has been through rigorous, logical criticism and review.
Consequently, an example is necessary to bring this together. Let us recall a theory that was the consequence of false knowledge. Originally, life, other than human life, was thought to have originated from non-reproductive methods. This theory was called spontaneous generations and was widely accepted during its time. For years, philosophers and scientists alike thought they knew abiogenesis fully using this as a basis, but their “knowledge” was incorrect because it was based on incorrect thinking and lack of extensive investigation, otherwise known as experience or perception. This theory has been disproved as further research in the field of abiogenesis has been conducted. Though people may have wanted to hope they knew what was the truth, they were using inferences, faulty ones, and invalid thought processes. This lack of perception misled them to misunderstanding of how life originating without having experienced or observed it.
Knowledge is the truth. It is what is factual and cannot be proven incorrect. Subsequently, the only method of turning something theoretical into something factual requires one of the ways of knowing to be fulfilled. When we do not experience something, we cannot know whatever it may be generally because of our inability to perceive it, as in the case of dark matter. Therefore, when conducting our daily lives, we should always keep in mind what is fact and what is speculative and never mix the two, or as the great Bertrand Russell puts it, “When you are studying any matter or considering any philosophy, ask yourself only, what are the facts, and what is the truth that the facts bear out? Never let yourself be diverted.”
