TOK Unit 2 Summative: Is bias inevitable in the production of knowledge?
Eugene Sun 2023.11.22
The production of knowledge, in common sense, should not contain any bias due to Pluto definition
of knowledge, which is true, justified, and believed. However, because humans take part in the
production of knowledge, and every human contains bias, whether to a subtle or severe degree, the
production of knowledge cannot escape from containing certain biases. There are several factors
affecting the impartiality of the production of knowledge. In the following two examples, I pointed
out three main reasons: the religious power affecting the public's mind, the limited scientific
methods to justify the correctness of knowledge and the public’s reluctance to give up their previous
knowledge.
1. A graph illustration of the geocentric theory
This geocentric theory illustration graph shows that the Earth is in the center of the universe. Under
this model, the Sun, Moon, stars, and planets all orbit Earth. Other planets or stars are rotating
around the Earth. Multiple gods are around the geocentric theory, illustrating the correctness of this
knowledge. We can see an angel holding a flag, "Ptolemy's geocentric mode," to show how gods
support this theory.
This model was biased since the cosmos has one center, not the sun and Earth. Furthermore, this
bias of preferring the Earth as the center instead of the sun was caused by religious power. The
religious support can be found both from the gods in this graph and in extras from Bibel. For
example, in Psalms, the world is described as immobile (Graebner, 1902). The bias, more
specifically, the unconditional support to the geocentrism, happened because the church in the
Middle Ages advocated geocentric theory and tended to prevent the spread of other theories.
This preference of accepting geocentric theory had negative effect to both the scientists and the
public. Scientists researched deeper and developed further astronomic theories based on the
assumption of earth-centered. Even worse, the Ptolemaic system enabled astronomers to make
accurate predictions of the motions of the planet, in fact more accurate predictions at first than the
Copernican theory which we now would say is true (Oreskes, 2014). This makes scientists trust
more on the worse geocentric theory. Moreover, the public at 17th century also preferred geocentric
theory, since this theory simply fit their direct sense to the world of sun, moon and stars were rotating
around the earth. Therefore, the bias of geocentric theory came also from the public’s belief of their
life experiences.
2. Criticism to Darwin’s theory of evolution
In March 1871, London's Hornet magazine published a famous caricature of an orangutan with the
head of an aged man with a white beard (James, 1871). The cartoon's title is A Venerable Orangoutang (The Venerable Orangutan), and the character is Charles Darwin (1809-1882), a leading
scholar of evolution. Darwin stated that all species of organisms arise and develop through the
natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete,
survive, and reproduce (Huxley, 1860).
The picture showed the criticism toward Darwin's theory of relativity. In the evolution theory,
Darwin proposed that homo-sapiens and other species of primates came from the same ancestor.
The bias of denying Darwin's theory of revolution was shown clearly by giving Darwin's raunchy
head a hairy monkey-liked body. This bias partly came from the need for more convincing
technological methods of confirming his theory, such as DNA testing. Since Darwin's evolution
theory did not have sufficient evidence when it first emerged, biologists were skeptical about this
idea. This rejection of theory of revolution blocked the further research on biology in DNA and
fossil developments. Besides scientists, the public also held bias in Darwin’s theory since people
still thought about humans ahead of other species because of our distinguished intelligence and
spread scandals on the research on theory of revolution. Last but not least, the church also engaged
in the criticisms of Darwin, since he blasphemed the god’s power. All in all, bias was formed both
in scientists, the public and religious people.
Reference
Fantoli, Annibale (1996). Galileo: For Copernicanism and the Church. University of Notre Dame.
p. 475. ISBN 0268010323.
Graebner, A. L. (1902). "Science and the church." Theological Quarterly. St. Louis, MO: Lutheran
Synod of Missouri, Ohio and other states, Concordia Publishing.
Huxley, T.H. (1860)."ART.VIl.-Darwin on the Origin of Species." Westminster Review (Book
review).
James, D.H. (1871). 'A reminiscence of Mr. Darwin', Harper's New Monthly Magazine, 69:413 (Oct.
1884), pp. 759–63.
Oreskes, N. (2014). Why we should trust scientists. Naomi Oreskes: Why we should trust scientists
| TED Talk.