Theory of Knowledge Essay

The prescribed quote speaks to one major idea, that accepted knowledge is ever changing, or provisional. As the quote states that accepted knowledge today is “sometimes discarded tomorrow,” it is implied that knowledge changes on the basis of the passage of time and any changes in situation based on the flow of time. Since the quote does not specify the area of knowledge in which knowledge is considered provisional in nature, it is assumed for the purposes of this essay that the message portrayed in the quote is that accepted knowledge in all areas of knowledge is provisional in nature. This essay will thus explore the knowledge issues behind the claim that knowledge is provisional in all areas of knowledge, using the natural sciences and history as the main areas of knowledge discussed within this context.

The idea that accepted knowledge in all areas of knowledge is provisional in nature is contradictory to what we normally perceive as true for knowledge. For instance, from our memory and perception, we know that theories in the natural sciences have been refuted with time, such as Arrhenius’s acid and base theory. Alternately, based on our perception and belief, accepted knowledge in history appears to be unmalleable in nature, as the events discussed in history have already occurred and are thus believed to be set in stone. In this case, based on the different ways of knowing we use to understand the natural sciences and history, the idea that knowledge is provisional for all areas of knowledge initially appears to be false. However, as we used different ways of knowing to arrive at this conclusion, the following knowledge question must be asked: To what extent can the ways of knowing be used to justify or dispute that the provisional nature of knowledge holds true in the natural sciences and history?

The natural sciences use the scientific method of hypothesizing, experimentation, observation, and verification as the basis on which knowledge is gained. Because knowledge is gained using a system of induction, the conclusions of an experiment only document the conditions shown of a phenomenon to date, and conclusions may be refuted at any time based on a single trial that shows the results of the experiment are invalid. It reasonable to say, then, that the accepted knowledge in the natural sciences is provisional. As mentioned earlier, Arrhenius’s acid and base theory was accepted at the time of its presentation as a model for the behaviour of acids and bases in solution. However, Arrhenius’s acid and base theory was replaced by Bronsted and Lowry’s acid and base theory in 1823 as the more accurate theory, highlighting the provisional nature of accepted of knowledge in the natural sciences.