Está en la página 1de 4

Alvaro Carbonero 11º

How can the different ways of knowing help us to distinguish between
something that is true and something that is believed to be true?
The ways of knowing, being the way in which we acquire knowledge, can
help us distinguish between the reality and fiction in the various areas of
knowledge. In the following essay we will see the ways in which the ways of
knowing can help us distinguish between something that is true and
something that is believed to be true.
A priori, we need to state how we can be certain that something is true.
Commonly, we would directly say that the way in which we can verify the
truthiness of something is by scientific confirmation and empirical evidence.
But this is false. The reality is that the ways in which we certify a thing is
true are different and they will not mean the same to each person. The best
example for this is faith. According to the webpage Theoryofknowledge.net,
Faith is one way of knowing which involves accepting information without
any proof on it more than the one you need, in other words, not relying on
information to accept the veracity of something. In contrast to faith, we
have the reasoning. This way of knowing is the opposite of faith since it
needs real proofs to make a decision. With these concepts, we can state the
truthiness of something can follow various ways according to each way of
knowing the person is using.
The fact we have not proven something will not mean it is unreal. In the
scientific and mathematical field, there are probably dozens and dozens of
theories which cannot be proven due to the technology we have now or
because they have not been proven yet, or simply because they cannot be
proven. So then, not even by using empirical evidence we will be able to
prove the veracity of each. It does not matter which way of knowing we use,
the rule keeps applying: if it has not been proven, it does not necessarily
mean it is false. We have multiple examples, to mention some we can look
at the mathematical conjectures which are mathematical propositions which
cannot be proven or are still in process of being approved. Maybe the most
famous example is the Goldbach Conjecture. Goldbach, in 1742, said: “at
least it seems that every number that is greater than 2 is the sum of three
primes”. (Weisstein, 1999). By the time Goldbach stated this, 1 was
considered to be a prime number. Because we do not follow that rule
anymore, the Goldbach Conjecture was restated by Euler being: all positive
integers ≥ 4 can be expressed as the sum of two primes, changing its name
to the strong Goldbach Conjecture. By having basic knowledge of math, any
person could say that this statement is true, at least in numbers in which an
average person could calculate. Most mathematicians think the conjecture is
true, and by empirical evidence, reasoning, we could say it is true until
some unknown point. By imagination, intuition and faith we could say the
strong Goldbach Conjecture is a fact rather than a proposition but it has not
been proven by more than two centuries. The conjecture could only go false
in terms of managing numbers bigger than millions, billions, trillions, etc. It

1999). The reason why he or she has to follow them does not need to be proven. to differentiate between something believed to be true from something which is actually true. Meanwhile. To give a strong example. to negate it. the weak Goldbach Conjecture was transformed from a conjecture to a theorem because it was proven by the Peruvian mathematician Harald Andrés Helfgott putting an end to a mystery which lasted for more than 200 years. the ways of knowing such as reason will take years and years. a recent date. as the quote says. Plait said: “The biggest problem is one of confirmation bias: finding an answer you already believe”. The example is the weak Goldbach Conjecture which states: “every sufficiently large odd number is the sum of three primes”. Using this two ways of knowing. Same happens in our case. for example. by reasoning. So then. the process could get simpler to the point you only need some minutes of reflection. is to find the confirmation. When we believe something is true. but by intuition and imagination. Since 2013. Until now. as we know. we can verify it. maybe centuries. but it cannot be proven. Going back to the thesis. at least it has not happened yet. In this example we can see a difference which is that it is no more a conjecture. such as faith? As Dr. This quote gives us the point that every human needs a confirmation to believe in something. then by memory and sense perception when the religion gets . By this we can state that what is believed to be true is not necessary true or false. following the example.is believed to be true. This is followed by language and emotion in more complex ways. Here comes the intuition and imagination. The biggest problem. Depending on each way of knowledge we can rather decide how to prove our thinking. which was not very mysterious really. but needed to be proven by empirical evidence and reasoning. a follower can say God exist because he believes He does. But if the person starts thinking. a person can decide without having empirical evidence that something is true by making a mental image and connecting dots which can be fallacies but to the person they are not. Depending on the preference of the person. there is no proven fact. how do we do this with ways of knowing which are opposite. The exceptions to this statement are poor or invalid. of the existence of God. we have discussed with examples how reason and areas of knowledge related to it can help us distinguish something we think is true from something which is true. to philosophy. the religion a person follows is the general way in which the person will reason according to the moral rules the religion gives him. (Weisstein. But. because in one way or another it can be related. if we use other ways of knowing. it is needed a big quantity of counter arguments and explanation for convincing ourselves that what we thought it is true. it is actually false. This is called faith and by faith a person can decide if something is true or wrong. We can have another similar example related to the area of knowledge of math. then he will notice he needs proves of his existence. But. we cannot verify the truthiness of the conjecture. By having as an example the catholic religion. the person can choose a way of knowing to decide whether the fact is true or false.

almost the opposite. we need faith in the veracity of the knowledge we already have as a Christian has faith in the existence of God. but it can hiec et ubique.very in-depth in the person. Finding reliable information in the internet about theology which uses logic and/or valid arguments may be difficult. the religion can follow each of the ways of knowing to make the person differentiate his belief from believing it is true to actually thinking it is true. Although. Marshall states that each scientific theory. I assume it will not fall down. as is the act of praying to god. needs to be backed up by faith. even in science and math. Summarizing. If we reach the day in which the gravity theory is disproven. We have complete and complicated ways of proven conjectures and other mathematical and scientific facts which can lead to years and years of investigating. my assumption will have proven to be in error. language. et al. It will not necessarily follow the same pattern with everyone having as an outcome other religions and atheism. Although. If it does fall down. memory. according to Marshall in his book The act of reasoning. many other branches will fall with it needing faith as something necessary. He says: “When I cross a bridge. the weak Goldbach Conjecture. history. As . it can also be used in all the areas of knowledge thanks to the faith we need in the previous knowledge we have. relating reasoning to faith. But Marshall gives us in simple words how faith can differentiate something believed to be true from something which is true. In this thesis. math and history. Going to the other point. to the person. Finally. the scientist who wants to make a conjecture or theory following as a base the gravity theorem. empirical evidence is needed as a way of knowledge to prove the veracity of these ones. as stated by Marshall. As a summary. But the act of crossing the bridge is an act of faith. to prove such things we need years and years of investigating reaching the point in which it can take more than two centuries to prove a fact which certainly was true. Following the gravity example. In the practical fields of science. must have faith in the veracity of the gravity theory for him to develop his own theory. the different ways of knowing can help us differentiate what is believed to be true from what it is actually true. et al in different ways. for example. putting as an example the Theory of Gravity. natural and human sciences. Faith may be the most complex or difficult way in which a person can differentiate what he believes to be true from what it is actually true. With reasoning applied in the areas of knowledge such as math. intuition. in the sense I am using the word.” He claims this to be a form of reasoning. In the long battle of atheism versus religion we can find various numbers from each band which simply have invalid arguments. Relating this to the thesis of this essay. religion can reach reasoning. With reasoning we need imagination. In the arts and religion it goes different. although not to everyone. we can discover a various ways of proving things. proven in 2013. faith can help us prove things without having the empirical evidence of it by having as an objective only believing in its veracity. we have two opposite sides having reasoning with empirical evidence in one side and faith in the other side.

com/GoldbachConjecture.html .theoryofknowledge. Adam. Eric. (1999). David. A Gnu Unicorn misses the point.a summary.wolfram.net/ways-ofknowing/ Weisstein. Goldbach Conjecture.blogspot. Retrieved from: Christ The Tao Blog http://christthetao. (On Faith). Retrieve from Theory of knowledge website http://www. (2012).com/5919830/how-to-determine-if-a-controversialstatement-is-scientifically-true Marshall. Retrieve from http://mathworld. we need all the ways of knowing to prove things in a various different ways going from years of investigation to just believing in its reality. (2014).com/2012/10/a-gnu-unicorn-misses-pointon-faith. Bibliography: - - - Theory of Knowledge. Ways of Knowing.html Henry. How to determine if a controversial statement is scientifically true. (2012). Retrieved from: Life hacker website http://lifehacker.