Compare and contrast our approach to knowledge about the past with our approach to knowledge about the future.

International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge

Our approach to knowledge, its creation and acquisition is a complexity which can never be concretized. Constant growth, evolution, development, changes mark all knowledge and are intrinsic to our very existence, creating an ambivalence that leads to the eternal debate – how do we grasp the past and fit it hand in glove to make it productive to our present. The crux of the matter is that we look back into the past subjectively and seek to apply it objectively to our present and future. The process of creation is a continual flux, new knowledge is created, there is constant movement which escapes exactitude and definition. The subjectivity of the past can and does influence the basis of all new found theories, making them biased just like history. When we create our own history, we make sure we use bare facts, surveys, database, statistics and calibrations to record and preserve – these are tools that were previously not applied to the assimilation of knowledge as much as they are applied now. Which is not to say that they did not exist at all, they did in some form or the other.

When we talk about knowledge about the past, the most obvious area of knowledge that springs to mind is history which is apparently a collection of facts. These have sometimes been viewed with skepticism and even downright disbelief. Henry Ford felt "History is bunk", thereby debunking all that past history had taught him. He was a man of action, a creator and he sought to create knowledge by inventing novel concepts rather than feeding upon what had happened. Napoleon, in a different era had also questioned the truths of history, saying that "History is a set of lies agreed upon," and implying that its imperative we learn to glean only that which is factual and lends itself to near truth. We are wary of accepting historical knowledge because we know that history was authorized by rulers and people in power. The historical accounts could have been compromised, and can present a distorted, prejudiced version of the past wars and truces. We depended on the pictorial languages of the past to decipher and gain knowledge of civilizations, the world over. Now translations between languages allow for wider exchange of thoughts, processes and cultures. From stone etchings to SMS lingo, it’s the application of knowledge that makes the contrasts appear wider and more distinct. If we were to question USA’s invasion of Iraq a century later, how would we view it?

This is a preview of the whole essay

To compare how we approach the past and how we look at the future is like playing with a simple battle of generational differences. We perceive the future based on today’s actions and it is a way of wishfully gift wrapping the days to come presuming the ‘ideal situation’ will transform into a ‘reality’. A part of this is based on our state of denial of some portions of knowledge created in the past which may have a direct and far reaching impact on the future but we may and we do choose to rebuff all such attempts to face reality. That is specially so when we start relying on the language of horoscopes, fuse it with a clouded perspective and try to reach a logical conclusion. No one did predict the great economic melt down that we are facing today, in spite of all the measures, analysis and tools available. There have been economic theories which have guided the world of finance and markets and have stood the test of time but applying them to the present day recession does not provide us with a solution for the future. All we hear is “we have to wait it out.” The contrast in the approach to knowledge from the past and the way we are applying what we know today to secure our future, in terms of the recession, is amply evident. So, its not an exaggeration to say that all knowledge is based on a convoluted and circuitous method of accrediting, filtering, and deleting our perceptions about the world. Hints, clues, and even guesswork, obtained and retained, continue to fuel most of our knowledge irrespective of the areas of knowledge or of the ways of knowing. Michel De Nostredam is being talked about again because he’s known to have predicted many major world events like the 9/11 disaster even though his prediction was not absolute and precise. It was a very vague description of the event and the disaster didn’t happen the way he had predicted it to happen but certain parts in his premonition provide enough evidence that it is the World Trade Centers that he ‘saw’ being brought down.

At forty-five degrees latitude, the sky will burn,
Fire approaches the great new city.

The common grounds that the past and future tread on, with the interface of knowledge playing its light footed role, is that we have depended on the collection of facts in the past and will continue to do so. "My interest is in the future because I am going to spend the rest of my life there.” This statement by Charles F. Kettering justifies our excitement to know our future. That is specially so when we start relying on the language of horoscopes, fuse it with a clouded perspective and try to reach a logical conclusion.

No actions can obliterate the past. Our intellect makes us examine it and use it to prepare for the future. Sci-fi like the Star Wars is the product of such imagination. So, one thing is established that where knowledge about future is concerned the ways of knowing that works best are intuition and emotion and overshadow reason. But when we talk of attitude towards the knowledge then skepticism vies with belief and we are not willing to plan and live our life on volatile hunches.

The future may be a figment of our imagination but the foundation is laid perceiving the present trends. Renowned writers have attempted to figure out what the future would be like; most of the bases of their work are part speculation and part premonition and also the scenario of their milieu. Aldous Huxley's Brave New World was written in 1931 and imagines the London of 2540. It anticipates how sleep-learning would be used to change the society by controlling the minds of the children. But it was not born totally out of his imagination. He studied the effects of the advanced technologies of chemical industries and Industrial Revolution and based on the contemporary concerns of the early 20th century he made predictions about the 24th century. However, all his anticipated knowledge was later discredited by scientific research.

Movies like ‘Back to the Future’, ‘Minority Report’, ‘Demolition Man’ all put forward the desire of what the future should look like and all of them differ from each other with great variation between them. This brings us to another aspect of knowledge about future. We view future in a more personalized manner while the knowledge about the past is viewed as a collective heritage.

In a way all the above stated examples perhaps bear out the truth that past, present and future are not and cannot be concrete segments but flow into each other and the knowledge of one influences the other. Knowledge is based more and more on the hard facts, collection of data and has an objectivity to it. This is especially true in the areas of Natural Sciences and Math for it is only because of Euclid’s system of geometry that we have the Riemann’s system of geometry. Theories of Natural science are the seed from which fresher theories evolve. In art and literature, too, trends give birth to each other making knowledge a continuous whole.

Our insatiable desire to know the future and the prejudices that rule our minds make us believe even the most fragmented and vague pieces of information that seems to outline some future event. A tale from Indian mythology creates a connection between the past and future. Lord Shiva’s sons, Ganesh and Kartikeya were asked to circle the world thrice. The one who did it the fastest would win the title of being the best loved son of Shiva. While Kartikeya whizzed around the world, Ganesh kept sitting. Just as he was about to complete the third circle around the world, Ganesh got up and went around his parents, Shiva and Parvati thrice and said “I won.” The logic he gave to a petulant brother was “you went around ‘the’ world, I went around ‘my’ world. This ancient ‘truth’ is exactly how the present is functioning for most of us and the future will evolve based on this belief. This draws attention to the state of human psyche today, it is ‘my’ world, ‘my’ thoughts, ‘my’ is most important and all knowledge from the past will be scanned to suit this to apply it to ‘my’ future. Indians believe that the Indus valley civilization is the pioneer, the source of all other civilizations. We also believe that in the future, India is going to emerge as a super power. This may be illogical and only partially true, but we are objectively collecting knowledge and moving steadfastly in the direction of fulfilling that dream. We have the history and we have hope for the future, we just need the correct perspective.

1577 words