Literature Vs Knowledge

Ever since the beginning of the self-aware human age, we have been known to go out of our way to find truth, whatever it may be in, not only the things we come into contact with every day, but most importantly the things that are not the most obvious or direct forms of acquiring knowledge. Therefore, when asked if “literature can tell the truth better than other arts or areas of knowledge”, we see that even though literature, being one of the oldest forms of conveying a message, dating all the way back to approximately the year three thousand B.C, it may not necessarily be the best way of acquiring knowledge, which in term could be interpreted as the ultimate basis for what we call “truth”. Because of this, other areas of knowledge and other art forms must be taken into consideration, and whilst literature may be more effective to one person, other forms may be more affective to others, thus making the point of individualized and perspective learning. From this, we can ask the question, “does individual perspective affect the core meaning of the message or truth trying to be conveyed”.
Some could argue that literature, not only as an art form in terms of fiction and dramatic entertainment, but in the sense of a way of passing on knowledge from one individual to another, is the superior form of acquiring knowledge simply because …show more content…
Language as a form of knowledge is present in every person’s life in at least on shape or form. Because it is so common, it is what we have come to understand the most and therefore are the most comfortable with. Because literature and language could be arguably the most simple and comprehendible way of excessive communication they could in hand be the most limited, leaving no room for interpretation, which in turn could have a positive impact on conveying the