To what extent should a knower group judge the value of knowledge gained by others? “Without application in the world, the value of knowledge is greatly diminished,” is a claim that one could use to answer that knowledge question. However, some areas of knowledge rely more intensively on application than others, so the claim is much too oversimplified to fully answer the question. Knower groups in one area of knowledge may not agree with another group’s form of application or some groups may not even choose to apply their knowledge, but this does not lessen the value of the knowledge held by any of the groups involved.
I believe that knower groups should attempt to judge the value of knowledge from others in order to understand the multitude …show more content…
Through a ninth grade Biology report, I learned that abortions are typically held within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. The information scientists have gathered through observation of fetal development demonstrates that fetuses, at 12 weeks, have human features and rudimentary nerve cells in the brain. However, the fetus shows no signs of conscious awareness of itself. Such knowledge is often used to refute the claim “life begins at conception” and support the idea that abortion is reasonable decision for a woman or a family to make. Without a doubt, the area of Natural Science has much to contribute to the national debate about abortion; still some groups do not hold the same beliefs. The pro-life side of the argument may use emotion as a way of knowing more so than reason, which is used by biologists and medics. Regardless of any scientific information that is revealed or discovered about the issue, the knower group is likely to remain pro-life because it exists in the Ethical area of knowledge, as the moral values one holds are not easily changed. Yet, we must consider application in this situation. Unless a group of anti-abortion individuals feel very strongly about the subject and could be considered activists, it is unlikely that their knowledge will be applied through methods such as political demonstrations or legislation. In this case, I believe both groups ought to critically consider each other’s points of view, how both gained these points of view, and the value of the knowledge both perspectives hold. Political compromise is the key stage we must reach, as opposed to an ethical compromise, in order to resolve the differences between certain knower groups in the areas of Natural Science and Ethics. All people are allowed their individual opinions, but all people are also held responsible under the same juridical
I believe that knower groups should attempt to judge the value of knowledge from others in order to understand the multitude …show more content…
Through a ninth grade Biology report, I learned that abortions are typically held within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. The information scientists have gathered through observation of fetal development demonstrates that fetuses, at 12 weeks, have human features and rudimentary nerve cells in the brain. However, the fetus shows no signs of conscious awareness of itself. Such knowledge is often used to refute the claim “life begins at conception” and support the idea that abortion is reasonable decision for a woman or a family to make. Without a doubt, the area of Natural Science has much to contribute to the national debate about abortion; still some groups do not hold the same beliefs. The pro-life side of the argument may use emotion as a way of knowing more so than reason, which is used by biologists and medics. Regardless of any scientific information that is revealed or discovered about the issue, the knower group is likely to remain pro-life because it exists in the Ethical area of knowledge, as the moral values one holds are not easily changed. Yet, we must consider application in this situation. Unless a group of anti-abortion individuals feel very strongly about the subject and could be considered activists, it is unlikely that their knowledge will be applied through methods such as political demonstrations or legislation. In this case, I believe both groups ought to critically consider each other’s points of view, how both gained these points of view, and the value of the knowledge both perspectives hold. Political compromise is the key stage we must reach, as opposed to an ethical compromise, in order to resolve the differences between certain knower groups in the areas of Natural Science and Ethics. All people are allowed their individual opinions, but all people are also held responsible under the same juridical