Theory of Knowledge Essay
Prescribed Title 6: “A skeptic is one who is willing to question
any knowledge claim, asking for clarity in definition, consistency in
logic and adequacy of evidence” (adapted from Paul Kurtz, 1994).
Evaluate this approach in two areas of knowledge.
Word Count: 1598
2
Smit
Essay:
As the ‘father of secular humanism’ the quote: “A skeptic is one who is willing to
question any knowledge claim, asking for clarity in definition, consistency in
logic and adequacy of evidence” explores Paul Kurtz’s personal interpretation of
what it is to be a skeptical knower ("Paul Kurtz 1925-2012."). It is assumed that
if a knower is unable to accept what is brought forward as a knowledge claim
without these elements, they are considered skeptical. We arrive at knowledge
on the basis of four ways of knowing; reason, emotion, sense perception and
language. In order to evaluate the truth of what is claimed to be knowledge, a
skeptic primarily assesses accuracy and validity through reason as a way of
knowing. Reason is formed on a basis of logic, evidence and critical thinking
and is used to justify truth. The validity of Kurtz’s approach in itself may be
examined within the Natural Sciences and History as areas of knowledge.
Prior to exploring different areas of knowledge, we need to consider why some knowers
are more skeptical than others. Skepticism arises from doubt, which arises from
assessing truth. Truth as a concept agrees with a knower’s idea of reality and it is
considered factual, honest and valid. A ‘true’ knowledge claim is one a knower accepts
and believes is correct. Paul Kurtz believes that skeptics question knowledge claims and
ask for justification in order to verify their truth. It may be that if a knower has had what
they considered to be a true knowledge claim compromised in the past, they may be
more skeptical of situations than others, as they are more doubtful of truth. Therefore, it
could be assumed that our environment, experiences, cultures, morals and religions
have an influence on our level of skepticism. These elements are apparent when forming
knowledge claims in all areas of knowledge. In terms of being skeptical of a knowledge
claim, it is difficult to quantify or qualify what is considered
Theory of Knowledge Essay
3
Smit
‘adequate’ evidence, or whether all three components must be fulfilled to arrive at
complete certainty, as this is specific to a knower’s level of skepticism. Skepticism
may also depend on other ways of knowing. For example, if a knower relies heavily
on emotion, they may value intuition over adequate factual evidence or rely on
informal reasoning fallacies to arrive at a conclusion. For instance, a knower may be
skeptical of a moral decision on the basis of the emotion it evokes rather than a lack
of factual evidence. Clarity in definition, adequate evidence and consistent logic
heavily rely on formal reasoning established through deductive methods, drawing
specific conclusions from general statements, and inductive methods, forming
general conclusions from specific cases (Bastian, Sue, 96) ("Deductive Reasoning
vs. Inductive Reasoning"). In the Natural Sciences, formal reasoning is used to form
theories and carry out scientific methods.
Knower’s within the Natural Sciences could be considered skeptics, who question
knowledge claims and seek justifications to support their theories rather than relying
on an emotional explanation. Physicists, biologists and chemists follow similar
scientific methods where by they conduct empirical research, form hypotheses, test
knowledge claims, and then observe and evaluate their results. Scientists use
inductive methods to form hypotheses but employ deductive methods to reach a final
conclusion based on verifying an invalid or valid hypothesis through testing it. For
example, the biological claim that all living things are made up of the smallest unit of
life, cells, that come from pre-existing cells comes from studying prokaryotic cells for
hundreds of years (Taylor, Stephen). Engineers developed technology, such as the
microscope, to aid the collection of evidence that allowed biologists to form
knowledge claims. In order for biologists to arrive at a certain conclusion, they used
Theory of Knowledge Essay
4
Smit
deductive reasoning to form consistent logical connections between propositions
that were accumulated through multiple studies using the new technology.
Therefore, in this case, to arrive at certainty, scientists primarily relied on formal
reasoning, seeking adequate evidence and consistency in logic to justify
knowledge claims. Biologists have also established principles that require
adequate evidence to accept knowledge claims. The Precautionary Principle
states that scientists must prove their actions will not harm the environment or
humanity before they proceed with them ("The Precautionary Principle."). In this
sense, if a knower is skeptical of a knowledge claim that a scientific creation,
such as genetically modified foods, may harm our health or environment,
scientists must provide adequate evidence of the contrary to justify the use of it.
There is a great level of uncertainty in the Natural Sciences regarding the origin of the
Earth, as knowers’ lack clarity in definition surrounding this topic entirely. Knower’s are
therefore skeptical to justify knowledge claims of Evolutionism versus Creationism.
Individuals may be skeptical of a knowledge claim as they lack adequate evidence to
prove divine creation, however, a knowledge claim may still be accepted, as there is
inadequate evidence to disprove it. For example, it could be argued that the theory of
Evolution has been hypothesized but not necessarily proven to be certain knowledge.
Fossils, selective breeding and homologous structures have been put forward as
theoretical evidence, however there is a possibility that these theories are wrong and that
the true claim has yet been discovered (Taylor, Stephen). Moreover, a lack of sufficient
evidence contributes to an unclear definition of the Earth’s origin and enhances
skepticism further. As an agnostic individual, I am personally skeptical of all knowledge
claims surrounding this topic, as although divine creation seems
Theory of Knowledge Essay
5
Smit
inconsistent in logic there is inadequate evidence to say that the existence of a
higher power may be disproved. Religious individuals may argue that faith is an
additional way of knowing. Pertaining to specific knowledge claims, faith may
overrule reason and dispute a skeptic’s demand for justification. Such knower’s
may disagree with Kurtz’s approach as although they are skeptical of the origin
of the Earth, their religious beliefs exceed the will to seek factual logical
evidence and clarity in definition as a form of justification. An issue that arises
from this topic and overlaps into another area of knowledge is the accuracy of
claims from the past and how this may hinder our Historical knowledge.
Our Historical knowledge relies on evidence from the past, however it is not easy to
elucidate evidence; nor is our evidence always considered adequate or logically
consistent. With the accuracy of History, and therefore the validity of it, as an area of
knowledge in question, knowers may be skeptical of whether any historical knowledge is
true at all. Focusing on terrorism and crime within the past as an example, theories
formed through deductive reasoning of events, such as 9/11, are often doubted by
conspiracists who believe there is either an inconsistent, or a lack of evidence to support
the claims. Media sources provided live video coverage of the attacks on the World
Trade Center as well as photos and witness statements, however conspiracies were still
formed and the media questioned. These skeptics form their own knowledge claims of
what occurred based on sequences of evidence they reason to be consistent in logic,
adequate in evidence and clear in definition. One of the greatest theories surrounding
these events is the idea that the attack on the Pentagon could not have scientifically
occurred based on the dimensions of the plane versus the size of hole it left after
colliding (Hoffmann, Jim). Here, skeptics use inductive reasoning from within another
area of knowledge to support the idea that inconsistent
Theory of Knowledge Essay
6
Smit
logic creates doubt in the validity of the knowledge claim and therefore the truth of it
is unjustifiable. Knower’s become more skeptical of a historical claim when facts
begin to change and knowledge becomes unclear and inconsistent. This is seen
through out History and as technology advances it becomes easier to purposely
deceive knowers through manipulating historical evidence, making it more difficult to
assess truth. For example, anyone is able to access software that allows you to
crop, cut and change the speed, colour or audio of visual evidence. Individuals are
able to construct personal social media profiles online using altered images and
choosing what and what not to display from their pasts, which constructs a false
reality of themselves and their lives. The North Korean leader, Kim Jong-Un, was
accused of altering photographs to provide false evidence of economic development
and military defense weapons in his country ("Altered Images: Questions over Kim
Jong-un's 'fuzzy legs."). The validity of the evidence was considered inadequate and
the claim doubted. Evolving technology as an environmental factor has strengthened
my doubt and skepticism and my need for finer evidence for it be deemed adequate,
more consistency for a claim to be considered logical and greater clarity in definition
to arrive at a sound justification. It can be assumed that as manipulation goes
against developing trust, it produces more skeptical knower’s who are reliant on the
combination of theoretically clear definitions, consistent logic and adequate evidence
to accept a knowledge claim.
In conclusion, in terms of the Natural Sciences and History as two separate areas of
knowledge, Paul Kurtz’s theory that skeptics “are willing to question any knowledge
claim and ask for clarity in definition, consistency in logic and adequacy of evidence”
is true when seeking certainty. Although some knowers arrive at a conclusion relying
Theory of Knowledge Essay
7
Smit
on faith, skeptics, in definition, are willing to question and ask, as they require some
form of formal reasoning to justify a claim, whether that is arrived at through a
deductive or inductive method. A skeptic may question a knowledge claim asking for
adequate evidence but not seeking consistent logic. Although skeptics may arrive at
truth without receiving complete clarity in definition, consistency in logic or adequacy
in evidence, receiving answers pertaining to these elements disputes doubt, which
enhances a knower’s certainty of a knowledge claim.
Theory of Knowledge Essay
8
Smit
Works Cited
"Altered Images: Questions over Kim Jong-un's 'fuzzy legs." BBC. BBC, 11
Oct. 2013. Web. 20 Jan. 2014. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogsnews-from-elsewhere-24495368>.
Bastian, Sue, Vivek R. Bammi, and Craig C. Howard. Theory of Knowledge.
Harlow: Pearson, 2008. Print.
"Deductive Reasoning vs. Inductive Reasoning." LiveScience. Tech Media
Network, 10 July 2012. Web. 20 Jan. 2014.
<http://www.livescience.com/21569-deduction-vs-induction.html>.
Hoffmann, Jim. "The Pentagon Attack: What the Physical Evidence
Shows." 9-11 Research. 9-11 Research, 28 Mar. 2006. Web. 20
Jan. 2014. <http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/>.
"Paul Kurtz 1925-2012." Paul Kurtz. Institute for Science and Human
Values, n.d. Web. 14 Jan. 2014. <http://paulkurtz.net>.
"The Precautionary Principle." Environmental Commons. Environmental Commons, n.d.
Web. 19 Jan. 2014. <http://environmentalcommons.org/precaution.html>.
Taylor, Stephen. "2.1 Cell Theory." i - Biology. WordPress, n.d. Web. 18
Jan. 2014. <http://i-biology.net/ibdpbio/02-cells/cell-theory/>.
Taylor, Stephen. "5. 4 Evolution (Core)" i - Biology. WordPress, n.d. Web. 18 Jan.
2014. <http://i-biology.net/ibdpbio/02-ecology-and-evolution/evolution/>.
Theory of Knowledge Essay