The quality of knowledge is best measured by how many people accept it

It is human nature to assess the quality and rate everyone and everything based on that. With knowledge, it is the same thing. We want to assess the knowledge. But how can the quality of knowledge be assessed? What are the criteria for different AOKs? I would define the “quality of knowledge” as the relative truthfulness of knowledge compared with other knowledge dealing with the same phenomena. This means that the quality of knowledge is how “truthful” it can get, but we cannot ever get to a point where knowledge is finite.

Truthfulness is a state, in which no distortion, concealment, and error are in place. We can also describe truthfulness as the closeness to a theory that perfectly describes certain phenomena. It is relative to other knowledge as we may never reach the “perfect theory” describing a phenomenon, but we may approach it from different angles to get as close as possible to the perfect theory. However, this definition may only be used for natural sciences as an AOK.

On the other hand, in arts, the “quality of knowledge” is assessed more based on the opinions of people on an art piece and the message the piece has. Here the concept of quality is quite vague and it is defined by professionals or a large number of individuals.

The problem is with the ways quality of knowledge could be measured. We can’t directly measure it as in sciences, as we do not have a “perfect theory” with which we would compare our knowledge.

Get quality help now

RhizMan

Verified

Proficient in: Galileo Galilei

4.9 (247)

“ Rhizman is absolutely amazing at what he does . I highly recommend him if you need an assignment done ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Thus, we create ways in which the quality of knowledge is assessed in the real world. Some of the widely used tools for assessment include the success in explaining the phenomena, the applicability of the knowledge, the acceptance of the knowledge, comprehensibility, and communicability. Therefore, assessing the quality of knowledge based on the number of people accepting is only one possibility of measuring quality. The question is, can the number of people be the main indicator of the quality? I believe, that it cannot stand by itself. To what extent can the number of people who disagree with the theory also affect the assessment of knowledge? I think, that disagreement would seriously hinder the use of theories, which might have higher quality based on my definition. Another important thing is who are the “people” in the quote? I will define them as the wider public, which also includes people, who don’t understand the knowledge. When we consider the time the definitions presented earlier may change in the future as new tools for assessing knowledge could be derived. Another problem with time is that the quality of knowledge degrades, this induces the replacement of the knowledge with a newer version. This concept is called the “half-life of facts” where the idea that all the knowledge, which was once used will become outdated and will not be used anymore. Another term worth defining is the concept of accepting knowledge. Accepting knowledge is believing in knowledge regardless of our understanding of the knowledge.

A similar concept as in the prescribed title is presented by the Conesus theory of truth. This theory claims that the statements that are agreed upon generally among the people are true. The phrasing of this theory is different than in the title, however, it works with the same concept.

In natural sciences, the knowledge we gain results from a long process of testing and applying the theories to the real world. The experiments proving theories are then reviewed and replicated by other scientists to assess the validity. This even further prolongs the process of gaining new knowledge. However, the reviews and all the parts of the process could improve the quality of knowledge produced. I think that for natural sciences, the best indicator of quality is the applicability of knowledge. In the past, some of the theories were not accepted initially only to be proven later. An example was their suggestion that the earth is round by Galileo Galilei. This was not accepted by most of the people, there was no proof and it was unimaginable for most the people. The Christian religion had a great influence on most of the European population. The fact that high-positioned Christians were against it due to its absence not being in the bible influenced people to go against it even though Galileo was also Christian. This was caused by the hierarchy in Christianity. The quality of knowledge can’t be assessed by the number of people in this case. An example of the opposite is Newton’s laws of thermodynamics. It is still accepted as most people believed in it up till today. We still haven’t found a better way of describing this phenomenon and thus the number of people is a good indicator in this case. I believe, that in natural sciences, the number of people believing in a theory is not a good indicator of quality. At least with our definition of the people. If the people, would only be professionals in the field, who understand the topic well, then I would agree with the prescribed title for natural sciences. The quality of the knowledge can also be higher in natural sciences if a larger number of researchers reach the same conclusion independently as there is a lower chance of error when the experiment is conducted by multiple people in different ways. This would show that the knowledge can be generally applicable and is not a deception.

On the other hand, in art the assessment of the quality of knowledge is different. Firstly, the question: “What is knowledge in art?” arises. I will define knowledge in art as the opinion, that us as knowers make on the artwork and also the purpose of the piece, which is given by the author. Our perception of the art piece through the prism of our perception is influenced by our shared knowledge. After defining the knowledge in art, the question: “how is the quality of knowledge in art assessed?” arises. In arts, the number of people that “accept” this knowledge is among the most viable ways of assessing the quality of it as there are not many other options. In the case of come knowledge in art as an opinion of knowers, there is a huge variance in the interpretation of the artwork. But the number of people, who have the same opinion is usually the best indicator of the quality of knowledge. This is because many individuals have assessed and interpreted knowledge of artwork and came up with the same solution. Another type of knowledge in art, the purpose of artwork, could be assessed by the number of people, who are affected by, relate to, or understand the knowledge it bears. However, here is the question, of whether the quality of knowledge in art created by individuals could be assessed by other individuals. It depends if the knowledge is shared or individual. If we take it as shared, then it could be assessed by others. However, if we take it as individual knowledge, it could not.

An example is The Happy Accidents of the Swing by Fragonard which was used by Disney in the movie Frozen in a happy scene. This was caused by a widely spread misunderstanding of this piece, as it is the representation of sex and cheating rather than a happy moment. Therefore, the original meaning from individual knowledge of the artist was changed into different information present in shared knowledge. Thus, when we move individual knowledge to our shared knowledge, it may be subject to distortion. When people accept knowledge in art, they take sides with an opinion or interpretation of the purpose. Therefore, the measuring of the quality of knowledge with are, several people accepting it is also closely related to the comprehensibility and communicability of the knowledge which areis the like other two indicators. This is because if the purpose of the artwork is not accessible and understandable, they do not accept it. The same with communication. The number of people accepting art knowledge indeed seems as the best indicator of the quality of knowledge. What is a problem here, is that most people do not view art through their own eyes, thus they don’t make an opinion on the piece of art themselves. For this very reason, the main assessors of quality here are the professionals, who spread their opinion about the purpose of the artworks. An example of an artwork, which could be interpreted in more ways is Café terrace At Night by Vincent Van Gogh. It is believed, that it is visible in this painting that Van Gogh was Christian, and for that reason, 12 people are sitting down and eating at the café. This shows us the purpose of the painting, and as many people accept this theory, the knowledge in it is of higher quality.

The knowledge ofapplications natural sciences and art is very different. For this reason, the quality is also assessed in different ways. In natural sciences, the number of people accepting a theory could be less relevant than in art. This is because natural sciences focus on real-worldapplicatioworld applicationsns applications. Therefore, the most accurate way to measure the quality of knowledge in science would be its real-world applicability. Whereas in subjective art, the number of people accepting a certain theory or having an opinion is the best indicator. For these reasons, the quality of knowledge could be assessed by the number of people accepting, however, it would be the,“best” measuring tool only in AOKs like art. In the AOKs which are based upon real-world applications other indicators may be more reliable.

Bibliography

1. ’10 Widely Misinterpreted Artworks – Listverse.’ 1 Jul. 2018, http://listverse.com/2018/07/01/10-widely-misinterpreted-artworks/. Accessed 20 Sep. 2018.
2. ‘Galileo Galilei – StarChild – NASA.’ https://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/whos_who_level2/galileo.html. Accessed 8 Sep. 2018.
3. ‘Habermas’ Consensus Theory of Truth – Jstor.’ https://www.jstor.org/stable/192479. Accessed 24 Oct. 2019.
4. ‘The Laws of Thermodynamics | Boundless Chemistry – Lumen Learning.’ https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-chemistry/chapter/the-laws-of-thermodynamics/. Accessed 4 Oct. 2018.
5. ‘What’s the “Half-Life of Knowledge’? | StratEDgy – Inside Higher Ed.’ 12 Nov. 2012, https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/stratedgy/what%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Chalf-life-knowledge. Accessed 13 Sep. 2018.
6. “5 Famous Paintings With Hidden Meanings – Art Gallery.’ 2 Nov. 2015, https://www.artgallery.co.uk/blog/post/2015/11/02/5-famous-paintings-with-hidden-meanings. Accessed 3 Nov. 2019.