"Uncertainty is inevitable at the frontiers of knowledge."

"Uncertainty is inevitable at the frontiers of knowledge."

In the context of the article from which this came from, the author of the article explains that scientists never side with a claim with absolute certainty. This is because even if they feel confident with their experiment, they still feel uncertain. Scientists do not want to declare that something is undeniably true because there is a chance that later on someone else can disprove their hypothesis. For example, a long time ago Ptolemy developed the geocentric theory and it was a widely believed fact that the universe revolved around the earth. Then Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo came up with the heliocentric theory, in which the earth, the moon, and other planets revolved around the sun. With the newly invented telescope, Galileo had new methods of understanding the composition of space. Scientists even today remain at least a little skeptical of the accuracy of their claims because future knowledge and technology could disprove their claims. Even in chemistry class, when we write labs, we never use the word "prove" because it implies an absolute certainty. Scientists do not want to proclaim an absolute certainty so they will not be completely wrong if someone disproves them later on.

“When the only tool you have is a hammer, all problems begin to resemble nails”

“When the only tool you have is a hammer, all problems begin to resemble nails”

I think that this quote refers to how the way that you see things limits what you see. So for example, if sense perception was the "hammer", then that way of knowing would limit the knowledge that a person could obtain through that way of knowing, so the person would only be able to see the "nails". Also, a philosopher named Ludwig Wittgenstein was well known for his philosophy of the limits on sense perception.

“Tell me,” he asked a friend, “why do people always say, it was natural for man to assume that the sun went round the earth rather than that the earth was rotating?” His friend replied, “Well, obviously because it just looks as though the Sun is going round the Earth.” Wittgenstein replied, “Well, what would it have looked like if it had looked as though the Earth was rotating?"

Here Wittgenstein's remark exemplifies the quote with the hammer and nails. Wittgenstein implies that sometimes sense perception can distort the way that we perceive knowledge. The quote with the hammer and nails reflects that ways of knowing, such as sense perception, can change the way we see things.

Rationalism vs. Empiricism

“There are only two ways in which humankind can produce knowledge: through passive observation or through active experiment.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?

I believe that this statement is accurate because it encompasses all the possible ways to acquire knowledge. The passive observation component refers to acquiring knowledge through unintentional means. The active experiment portion refers to acquiring knowledge intentionally, by manipulating variables. Various ways of knowing (WOK) fall under either active experimentation or passive observation. Language falls under both because language is passed down from generation to generation, which is a form of passive observation. Language is also experimentation because people had to create the words initially, and like Alia mentioned in class, Shakespeare made up words which are part of the English language today. Sense Perception falls under passive observation, because you are not consciously trying to acquire knowledge. Reason falls under active experimentation because you have to manipulate variables in your head when you reason. Emotion can fall under passive observation because it is an involuntary response to a particular situation. Imagination falls under active experimentation because your mind creates imagination consciously. Memory can fall under passive observation because some things are imprinted in your memory unintentionally, but it can also be active experimentation if you purposely try to memorize something. Intuition falls under passive observation because it is unintentional and it is not something that you can manipulate parts of. Faith can fall under passive observation because if someone sees a miracle, it could make them have faith. Some of these WOKs can overlap, even ones I did not mention. But they can all be classified under either of the two categories.

Ethics Reflection

Do we generally use reason or emotion to make ethical decisions? Which one should we use?

Ethics is defined as "a system of moral principles", or as "the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc". In my opinion, people generally use emotion to make ethical decisions or ethical judgements in general. For example, if I was in the position where it was possible for me to cheat on a test and get away with it (like Calvin in the comic :D), I would decide not to cheat because of the emotions associated with it. For example, I would feel guilt and possibly shame and/or disappointment in myself for cheating.Those emotions would factor in to my ethical decision of whether to cheat or not. People's emotions generally contribute to people's "gut feeling", which then contributes to the ethical decisions that they make. In addition to this, people do use reason to make ethical decisions. However, it is usually used for longer-term decisions. If someone was forced to make an ethical decision on the spot, they would most likely use emotion to make their decisions. But, if someone was allowed to think a particular issue over and then make a decision, they would use reason to make their decision. However, people often make their decision regarding an ethical issue pretty quickly, because their emotions shape their decisions so heavily.

So then which one, reason or emotion should we use to make ethical decisions? I believe that both reason and emotion are needed in order to make the best decision regarding ethics. There are always two sides to issues in ethics. If you only use emotion, then you would not be able to understand both sides of the issue in order to make a calculated decision. Reason can help remove the bias that someone may have regarding an issue due to their emotions. Emotions can skew the way that people perceive an issue, so for example, when we were talking about the prospect of free college tuition. I wholeheartedly supported the side that argued that college should be free. Compassion made me feel that everyone should have the opportunity to have a college education. My stance was almost completely decided on the emotions that I felt regarding the issue. However, as people began discussing the other side of the argument, I realized that I did not even think of reason at all when making my decision on how I felt about the issue. Even though that situation does not completely relate to ethics, it goes to show that emotion can cloud your better judgement when making a decision. However, reason alone should not be used in making ethical decisions. Emotions can put you on the right path to deciding the right thing to do. Making an ethical decision without certain emotions like compassion or kindness could result in making an ethical decision that is harmful to someone. So if your friend came up to you after taking a test and admitted that they had cheated, the right thing to do would be to tell the teacher that they cheated. And while that is the right decision, making the choice without compassion and without thinking of the repercussions of the decision on your friend would be destructive to your friendship.

Ivory Tower Reflection

What are the three biggest problems facing universities today?

Higher education consists of many problems today that did not exist in previous generations. The biggest and most evident problem facing universities is the issue of cost. Parents have to find a way to pay for their kids' college tuition, room and board, textbooks etc. Colleges are charging an extreme amount of money for their students and this is creating a burden on parents to find a way to support their children's dream schools. Students now are paying triple what students 30 years ago had to pay. This issue will continue to grow until people eventually decide that going to college is not necessary given the price.

Another issue facing universities is the need to prepare students for the workforce. Employers feel that college students lack skills like communication and teamwork skills which are necessary for the workplace. If colleges do not prepare their students for the workplace, employers will favor other employees who may not have a degree.

Colleges are also becoming increasingly obsessed with competition and outdo-ing each other. Universities are vying for the top positions in various rankings. They build extravagant facilities at their campuses that also contribute to the issue of affordability as students have to pay more in their fees to accommodate for those new facilities.

Ivory Tower Knowledge Question

KQ: In what ways does emotion justify perspective in ethics?

Economics

Is economics a science?

To determine what constitutes a field of knowledge as being a science, the definition of a "science" should be established. According to the Science Council, science is: " the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence."

http://sciencecouncil.org/about-us/our-definition-of-science/

A key point to what a "science" denotes is that it is a so-called "empirical field" which means that it is based off of observations and evidence.Economics therefore is a science. It uses observations and evidence to create knowledge. Economists use observations such as measuring variables such as prices and market size. Economists use evidence such as sales or stock. Though economists may not be able to conduct experiments in the same way that subjects like biology and chemistry do, by directly altering a certain variable, economics is a science.