The Knower’s Perspective Is Essential in the Pursuit of Knowledge, Essay Example

Introduction

It is usual for people to think of knowledge as something separate from how it is learned. We tend to believe that facts, information, and knowledge in general is “there” and waiting to be understood. To some extent this is true. In the worlds of the sciences, for example, there are countless fact which we come to learn over time and these are what we know as realities. Even when new information changes the thinking, it is still held that the knowledge was only mistaken by us; it has not really changed and all that was needed was our better means of discovering the truth. At the same time, however, even the sciences are affected by how people investigate them. The “truth” that the Earth was the center of the universe was long accepted and because mankind insisted on this as supporting the greatness of humanity. It is then likely that “science” in this matter was based on feelings and thinking motivated to justify the conclusion. The same influence applies to math. Even as we demand that math follow logic, it often happens that the person’s motivations have an enormous effect on reaching solutions. For example, Tao’s book on mathematical problems and student motivation stresses that it is important for children to want to solve the problems, and that a student’s excitement is more valuable than any teacher’s demand that the work be done (Larson). In plain terms, there can be no solution for the most difficult problems unless to individual is determined to find it, so knowledge depends upon perspective.  People must also have a powerful belief that the solution exists and that only greater effort will discover it. In cases like this, then, perspective is vitally important. Maybe the most famous example of perspective influencing math and the sciences is how the most brilliant minds studied Einstein’s equation, E=MC². The thinking was so revolutionary, mathematicians and physicists worldwide were motivated to prove or disprove it.  Perspective, which is really the individual’s viewpoint based on their feelings, experience, and thinking, generated intense effort. This being the case, great minds decided that Einstein’s work was correct, and this would not have happened without the force of those perspectives. In the following, how human perspective actually shapes knowledge itself will be further investigated, and it will be seen that individual approaches and viewpoints have a vast impact on knowledge itself.

Argument

The pursuit of knowledge as depending upon perspective, or at least greatly influenced by it, is evident in many areas of knowledge. History alone provides many cases of human approach as producing, refuting, and uncovering knowledge. One of the strongest examples of this is the legendary fall of the Roman Empire. It was widely known, and for many centuries, that the empire’s fall occurred over a long period of time and this changed the entire reality of the Western world. As the impact of this collapse was so immense, historians then devoted great effort to discovering exactly how and why this happened. Many insisted that the invasions of the barbarians were responsible, and that Roman forces were eventually unable to fight off the invaders. Others turned their attention more toward what was occurring in Rome during the centuries of collapse, and presented the knowledge that the Roman culture itself was weakening and increasingly corrupt. Still others investigated and believed that lead poisoning in the water or a population decrease led to the empire’s fall. In each case, different knowledge was produced and reflected the beliefs motivating the historians. Today, it is generally believed that a combination of elements were responsible, and this seems to be the most logical explanation. One force, as in state corruption, leads to weakness that works to give invaders opportunities. The main point, however, is that any form of this specific knowledge has been shaped by how each historian has been motivated to find it. This is true of ambition alone, as in the example of Einstein. The sheer desire to test knowledge is personal to a degree, so perspective is very much an important factor. Put another way, perspective has no power unless there is intent behind it. This being the case, strong motives to learn the truth in this subject were, and are, both behind the pursuit of knowledge and in place to direct the thinking. It is also important to realize how, over time, new perspectives lead to the study that increases the knowledge.

What the above then indicates is how perspectives often are created by existing knowledge itself. This in itself is extremely important in understanding the power of perspective in general. Once again, it connects to individual motivation. For example, it was long accepted as “knowledge” that Columbus opened up the New World, which in turn created the “knowledge” that he was a brave explorer. For many years this was generally accepted as fact and taught in American schools to millions of children. In more modern times, however, new evidence was uncovered revealing that the arrival of Columbus to the Americas triggered disease, slavery, and conquest. What was thought of as knowledge then was established as being myth or legend. What is important here is that those changing the “knowledge” were motivated to challenge thinking they felt to be wrong, just as the acceptance of the new information worked in a different era.

By the late 20^th century, Americans were not as intent on maintaining a legend and more willing to accept hard truths. The perspectives of the society then promoted the perspectives of the historians influencing them. Facts may be facts, but the impact of them very much depends upon human investigation of them and the reception they receive, so perspective is almost always in place in the evolution of knowledge.

An even stronger example of how perspective goes to the pursuit or acceptance of knowledge may be seen in the mid-20^th century. One leader, Adolf Hitler, presented ideas and “knowledge” to the German people, insisting that Germans were biologically superior to other nationalities and races.  Hitler then found experts to support his thinking and millions of Germans accepted this as reality or actual knowledge. It is easy today to point to this as mistaken thinking motivated by military and political agendas, but the truth remains that, during these years and in that nation, all of this was accepted as knowledge and because the perspectives supported German superiority as fact.  It may even be argued that, had the war turned out differently, many nations would probably be holding to the same thinking as knowledge. In reality the defeat of the German armies exposed the truth to all, but it is interesting to consider that a German victory would have maintained the “knowledge” behind the aggression of the Axis powers. Once again, then, perspective has an enormous effect on what is taken to be knowledge.

Counter Argument and Rebuttal

It may be argued that the original statement here supporting knowledge as separate from human ideas or feelings about it is the primary issue. No one can question that people have many different motivations to seek or refute knowledge. It is in fact likely that humans have always affected the state of knowledge through perceptions of it at all times. This interpretation factor is basically “built into” human beings, just as knowledge is usually used to promote other ideas, beliefs. None of this, however, should be allowed to be confused with knowledge itself. Human pursuit is then irrelevant to the realities of knowledge, even when pursuits go on for centuries or never achieve the knowledge. It itself is always in place, no matter how perspectives find, reconsider, or deny it. To attach importance to the human pursuit of knowledge based upon perspectives is to wrongly view the essence of knowledge itself.

This is a strong argument but it also ignores the most fundamental reality of all. There can be no real understanding of knowledge without accepting that only human perception defines it. Knowledge exists as such only because human beings insist that it does, even as they change their views over time. Endless examples of this basic reality reinforce its strength. For many years, it was completely accepted as knowledge that human beings were created by God or other divine forces. Many still believe this to be the truth, so it is “knowledge” that exists through belief. Then, Darwinism and other thinking holds to the knowledge that humans are evolved from more primitive forms of life, and this too is “knowledge.” In each case what creates the knowledge is the human support it receives, which is a matter of perspective. In plain terms, there can be no knowledge without both the perspectives going to its search and those reinforcing it as real knowledge.  No matter the quality of facts, humanity is always subjective so perception is the greatest defining element of knowledge.

Conclusion

As the above supports, the perspective of the knower is crucial to the pursuit and recognition of all knowledge, and in more than one way. The perspective goes to motivation in discovering knowledge, just as it serves the vital purpose of validating it, and these processes are in place even as knowledge is tested and changed over time. The extent of this truth is virtually limitless, and because of a fact that cannot change: humanity is subjective, and in individual and collective form. The approach or pursuit of knowledge must always rely on how human beings are engaged in the activity, and even the most purely logical perspectives must be influenced by the perspective at the moment. Consequently, the statement is absolutely true, and because individual approaches and viewpoints must always have an enormous impact on knowledge itself.

Works Cited

Larson, Loren. “Book Review: Solving Mathematical Problems: A Personal Perspective.” Feb. 2010. Web. 23 Dec. 2015.                                                                                                                                                                <http://www.ams.org/journals/notices/201002/rtx100200244p.pdf>