Essay+question

“And what, Socrates, is the food of the soul? Surely, I said, knowledge is the food of the soul.” (Plato). Knowledge is to know something. The human is an ignorant and hungry creature scavenging the Earth for answers, answers about the physical world and human society. Our soul is hungry for knowledge and we seek it through ways of knowing. Firstly, knowing something can be divided into two categories, they are empirical and rational. Empirical is something that is done through experiment and testing while rationalizing is done through much thought and consideration. The ways of knowing are language, sense perception, reason, and emotion. Each way of knowing has a specific weight in a claim for knowledge within the two areas of Natural science and Human science. Among the ways of knowing the three that will be focused on are sense perception, reason, and emotion only because language is dependent on the culture and society. Language is very important and is heavily determined in providing a claim for knowledge. For example, in mathematics the language of numbers is something that has been advanced to help ease the understanding of mathematical concepts and equations. Over time language has developed and has provided an easier access to knowledge. Nonetheless the main focus is to understand that the two sciences, Natural science and Human science, have the same weight for a claim in knowledge according to the three ways of knowing excluding language and they are sense perception, emotion, and reason.

Natural science is the branch of science that deals with the physical world such as physics, chemistry, and biology. Upon gaining knowledge in such a vast field the ways of knowing are key elements in developing an understanding. Sense perception is to perceive the world around you through the five senses. In Natural science to perceive or to sense the world around you has its own weight in this area. It is an important factor because it is what leads to findings however, it is only used to determine readings. For example, if one wanted to know at what temperature ice melted, a simple thermometer will read the temperature at which the ice begins to turn into water. Sense perception is used in natural science however, does not have as much weight as some of the other ways of knowing. Likewise in Human science sense perception is also a weak component in promoting a claim for knowledge. This is because much of the sense perception done is simple reading, by seeing, of tools, people, land, fossils, and animals. Sense perception, as stated before, is to perceive the world around you using the five senses. For example, in archeology, upon searching for fossils or other historic artifacts sense perception is used to find such fossils and artifacts by feeling and seeing where things are and yet sense perception did not fulfill the purpose of archeology. If the purpose of archeology is to understand human history and prehistoric times, sense perception is limited in claiming knowledge. In most cases of Human science and Natural science sense perception is used, however is not used to succeed the true purpose of the study, therefore its claim for knowledge is weak in both categories.

Another way of knowing similarity between the two sciences would be emotion. Emotion is the effect one has from an experience through perception. Emotion, like perception, has a weak claim for knowledge in the two sciences. This is due to the level of perception. What one feels is determined by what the person perceives. For example, in physics, an emotion can be excitement or even anger, however, the outcome of the experiment is not based on what you felt but more so on what you found, regardless of what you believe was correct. Let’s say I conduct an experiment to determine the boiling point of water, and on accident feel the hot stove and burn myself. From perceiving the hot stove, by touching it, I have developed an emotion to that perception, anger. My anger does not affect the purpose of the experiment, determining the boiling point of water. Similarly within human science such as economics, emotion has little claim for knowledge. In anthropology, for instance, my emotion after perceiving a person with strange habits does not affect the final result of the study. Emotion however, weighs slightly more in human science than it does in natural science only because in human science there is the problem of affection. For example, in anthropology one may study different people and their habits. With the emotion of possibly hatred one can make false judgments and conclusion. Overall, the way of knowing of emotion is the same as perception and is almost as equally important in both sciences.

Both sciences are heavily weighed down by reason. Reason makes up most of the two sciences in providing a claim for knowledge. Reason is the justification of an experience. Reason can be divided into subcategories; they are deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, and informal reasoning. Deductive reasoning is justification done by creating a clause from general information to specific information, while inductive reasoning is the opposite of that. Inductive reasoning is justification done by creating a clause from specific information to general information. Both deductive and inductive reasoning are based on methods while informal reason is a non-method justification, which is often looked at as a weak claim for knowledge. In Natural science almost everything is done empirically and is used to gain knowledge. As an example, in chemistry, to know which elements are metals and gases and how to differentiate between them experiments are conducted. After results are analyzed a conclusion can be made. This conclusion is based on all the data gathered and the whole process is reasoning. After the conclusion is agreed many other tests are done to verify the accuracy of the result. This whole process is reasoning or rationalizing an experiment done. Rationalizing is part of the empirical method in knowing. In human sciences there are some discrepancies where much the reasoning is done by the method of rationalizing. As part of the human science, anthropology is the study of people where much rationalizing is needed compared to experimentation. The process of comprehending what has been done is almost completely the essence for claiming knowledge in both sciences. Yet comparing the types of reasoning done by each science is different. Human science is more based on the rationalizing method of reasoning, while Natural science is based on the empirical method of reasoning with forms of rationalizing.

Sense perception, emotion, and reason each play a certain part in the claim for knowledge in each science. Both sciences are similar in the amount of the ways of knowing they used. Both use perception and emotion for the minor parts of the study while reason is the main factor in both sciences in determining the knowledge of the particular study.

Hi Faris, Nice work on this. I believe we need to revisit the last line in the second last paragraph. Is empirical analysis the same in each field the same? Can data be just as easily interpreted in each? You make some good comments about the role of emotion in affecting interpretation too. You are on the way here. Vast improvements. Let's keep honing these arguments.