Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Brecht's: Life of Galileo

By Monday Tuesday night:  I am going to bed!  I will release posts in the morning 9:02 pm

Read pages 42-44

1.  Post your response to the following on the blog:

Reminder: drop down menu-anonymous and use first name only

~Should knowledge be based on authority of the evidence of the senses?
~What knowledge issues arise in the excerpt?  (refer to KI brochure)
~What other examples can you think of that are similar to Galileo's plight?


2.  Reply to one classmate

~Respect
~Open-mindedness
~Proofread prior to submitting your post (tone)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

REFLECTION IS STILL DUE FRIDAY BY MIDNIGHT

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
READ CHAPTER 3 LANGUAGE OUR 1ST WOK BY WEDNESDAY



63 comments:

  1. Franklin
    1.) Not all knowledge should be based on the authority of the senses. In our world today we have technology as a basis of authority when it comes to knowledge, but there is a deeper meaning to the concept of knowledge and its connection to senses. Our senses may help us distinguish many similarities and differences in our world, but there are many things in our world that the ignorant mind wouldn’t know of even though they have senses. For example, we may see plants grow but some people don’t know the deeper concept of photosynthesis and where it may take place in the place. Why? Well our senses don’t allow us to see photosynthesis take place because it’s a basis of analysis and observations through technological research. Therefore, senses should not always have the ultimate authority in knowledge because there is more to knowledge than what you see, hear, smell, feel, or taste.
    2.) The knowledge issues that arise in the excerpt is:
    • Can a fact exist without a context?
    • Distinguishing between deductive arguments (Valid and invalid)
    • What concludes good evidence?
    3.) A personal example which I could connect to Galileo’s perspective is the personal beliefs of my grandfather and his indifferences towards religion. He states that there is no God because he can’t see him or connect to such spiritual force. He believes that God is a myth which humans have set forth in their lives, and also states that just because the bible says that there is a God doesn’t mean it’s true because no one has seen or spoken to “so called God.” In conclusion, this connects to the views of Galileo and how they both believe that you need to perceive through senses to acquire the true beliefs and not always on factual evidence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with your questioning of what type of evidence should be accepted. But my own religious bias makes me disagree with what your grandfather believes. People have different perspectives and a group of people looking at the same picture would not share the same results. This would conclude my view that senses are deceiving just like the heart and should not be taken as fact, even if one might think their senses are the only things they can trust in this world. God isn't visible but that shouldnt be the only argument against his existence.

      Delete
    2. I agree with your point of view. My only disagreement would be that I think that Galileo's point of view was in context becuase it was disputing an earlier claim made by Aristotle.

      Delete
    3. I can understand what you are saying in terms of reling on our senses as the sole basis of our knowledge. Your use of a plant's growth and development via photosynthesis is a great example of how the senses do not provide people with concrete evidence on every subject.

      Further analysis should provided when using the senses as the main indicator to support or refute information.

      ~Jasmine

      Delete
    4. I definely agree with your number 1 about the ignorance of our knowledge. It makes me think about what I wrote.

      Delete
    5. Um...you may have made a bit of an error in your thinking. Technology and the senses are not two different things, for technology can, in fact, enhance the 5 senses. When Galileo questioned the old Ptolemaic way championed by Aristotle, he used eveidence his own eyes gathered to back up his claim. A telescope allows one to see far away objects, and Galileo used a telescope to analyze the movements of far away objects, including stars and planets. So, Galileo used a telescope to actually SEE the real motions of stars and planets, and the evidence he gathered via looking through his telescope told him that something was off. As a result, he used the eveidence to question the Ptolemaic way of thinking. If he never had that telescope, then he never would have been able to make the discoveries he did make.
      --Michael

      Delete
  2. 1. Knowledge should be based on the evidence of the senses. In my mind knowledge is something acquired through experience. When people use their senses to experince something for themselves they can gain understanding, belief, and knowledge on that concept. Knowledge should not be based on authority because that authority figure recieved that knowlege through their individual findings.

    2. In this excerpt the charcters have a conflict where Galileo urges the other people to rely on their sense to truely "know something", while the others use history to know certain ideas. Why would the other charcters choose to rely on someone else's (Aristotle's) research and personal discovery as the basis of their knowledge of astronomy?

    3. Similar examples of Galileo's plight can be found in "Plato Book VII of the Republic The Allegory of the Cave". This is the story of people that are comfortable living in ignorance. They grow up in ignorance and refuse to accept the truth or possible truths with open arms. Someone tried to change their minds and let them experience something new but change can be hard to come by.

    ~Jasmine

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So if knowledge is acquired through experience isn't that synonymous to "authority" over time?
      ~Romance

      Delete
    2. What if a person hasn't gone through certain experiences? How would they acquire knowledge of a concept? -Jessica >_<

      Delete
    3. I believe what your saying about knowledge being aquired through experiences in life, but like the previous comment, what about those who don't exactly go through experiences which others may see as a key to knowledge. Apart from authority and knowledge, I could just say that I believe people obtain knowledge in different ways depending on their personal preference. As a result, knowledge has many spectrum which allow us humans to narrow down with experiences, and senses.
      -Franklin

      Delete
  3. Knowledge should be based on a combination of evidence of both evidence and senses. To some, senses may be considered as evidence, whereas senses might not seem as evidence to others (considering the fact our senses, like sight and hearing, can fool us). Evidence can be seen as reinforcement to senses in terms of solidifying knowledge. Knowledge uses that arise are:
    If we are skeptical to evidence, what makes us not be skeptical to knowledge drawn from what we see? How does we know if senses or knowledge are right? One example similar to Galileo’s plight would be that of religion. A popular Bible story is that of when Mary Magdalene saw Jesus’ spirit after death. Her senses defied the evidence of his death. How did the people she told react? There was a conflict in knowledge between what Mary saw and what the disciples had seen when Jesus died.
    -Jessica

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. -I think it's clever of you to oppose evidence of the senses. It is true that under certain circumstances, senses can definately be fooling.

      -The people of this story show a pattern of disbelief. I figured they were stuck in a sort of ignorance. Do you agree, and if so, why do you think they feared the truth waiting them through the lense of the telescope?

      -Aaliyah!!!!

      Delete
    2. -Jessica: I do agree that both evidence and senses can deceive you. I think that you have to take everything into consideration and in a way combine the evidence with the senses.

      -Aaliyah: I think that the people in the story feared what they would see through the lens of the telescope because they were scared that they would be proven wrong and now have to reevaluate everything that they had been taught; everything that they thought they already knew.

      -Kayla

      Delete
    3. Aaliyah, I do agree with you! I think they feared the truth because it'd defy everything they'd been raised with. Their thoughts about the stars, were like a truth to them, their essence you could say. Can you imagine how it'd be to have someone tell you that everything you thought was true, turned out to be a huge lie? "Ignorance is bliss" right? I suppose these people didn't want to face a truth that turned down their beliefs.

      Kayla, yes in order to gain knowledge, I agree that everything has to be taken into consideration ! Or else you'll be missing a few pieces of the puzzle. Those missing pieces could be the most crucial parts.

      Delete
  4. 1. Not all knowledge can be based on your senses. Your eyes can deceive you, your mouth can spill lies, your ears can hear fables, you cant feel emotion, and you cant taste the truth. You also cant base your knowledge off of authority. As Galileo quoted "Truth is born of the times, not of authority" is agreeable but his theory of evidence through senses can also be challenged. What is considered truth now 25 years from now can be considered a theory. So you cant base your knowledge on authority.

    2. Can you really believe what you see?
    Should you base your knowledge on time?
    If no one believes you did it really occur or can it really happen?

    3. This reminds of the question "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound or did it really even fall? This reminds me of that because some people believe that yes the tree fell and made a noise based on scientific fact that the size of the tee is bound to make a noise regardless if anyone is around. Some people believe that the tree didn't fall based of the fact that they weren't able to witness or hear the tree fall (evidence of senses).
    ~Romance

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you Knowlegde can not only be based on your senses. You asked Can you really believe what you see? i believe it by choice. You choose to accept or decline what you want also known as theory of Pragmatic truth which is This theory holds that true statements are those that work for us and meet our needs better than their alternatives.
      -Esther

      Delete
    2. I agree that knowledge can be acquired through our senses, but it also comes from authority as well. We are born into the world knowing nothing. The basic things in life that we learned was from us being told by an authoritative adult. We aren't born into the world knowing everything, some things we are told to us. From there we then decide to reject or accept what is being told to us.
      -Ihu

      Delete
    3. I do agree that knowledge cant really be based through authority like Galileo quoted and like Mr. Hepburn says you cant really prove anything, there is a lot that plays into trying to prove something that also works on determining knowledge and how our senses which are not as reliable, play into it.
      Jayeon

      Delete
    4. I agree that not all knowledge can be based on your senses. Our senses can sometimes deceive us a guide us to believe something that is not the truth. In other words, our senses are not always reliable.
      -James

      Delete
  5. Knowledge is something that a person has conqure over the years, whether it be because of experinece, facts and even your five senses can be used to describe knowledge. Once your senses come in play it plays a really big role in your life, but at times our senses can deceive us. For an example most people whom are blind or are not capable of one of the five senses they become inadequate and forced to use the must strongest one.In this new age and day things are never really how they seem, you can not even trust yourself , let alone be knowlegeable about the things that you've seen, heard, smelled and or felt. In the extract 'life of Galileo' it seems as if there ancient equipment system held them from getting the knowledge needed, it also as stasted in the text that thats why they made great diffulties in thier calculations. By making you convince yourself of what there is to belive is another form of knowledge is not the authority of the evidence of the senses.
    The knowledge issues that arises are knowing something for a fact and whether the steps we took to get where we are.KI comprehends with appying everything we have learned in each class or are learning and how to apply it.
    Galileo plight reminded me of how people treat homosexuals. Because of what they have read or what thier beliefs were they have such a strong hate towards them and not realizing that they should hate the sin not the sinner and just because thier sin is not different from other sins listed in the Bibles, it is forever an unknown.

    ReplyDelete
  6. In my opinion knowledge can be acquired by the use of senses and on authority, but others would rather reject the thought that knowledge can be acquired solely on the dependence on authority. With the use of the telescope, Galileo could determine where stars were located, but there were some flaws with his telescope. In that sense there are some things that could not be proved and that werent supported by what Galileo saw in the telescope; i think that is where authority can be applied. Although we use our senses to help prove what we know or think we know, our senses can deceive us, therefore it is not completely reliable. On the other hand the dialogue on pgs. 42-22 gives depending on authority a bad connotation, because the people involved constantly brought about the beliefs of Aristotle instead of dealing with what Galileo provided. Knowledge issues that this pertains to are:
    -The piece of text that we read about the mouse and the people at the party. The main character used his senses to reach the conclusion that the mouse at the cheese, and the others believed that the mouse ate it because they trusted the main characters opinions and views.
    -Also this pertains to religion because many Christians use their beliefs in God to guide their outlook in life, but obviously God is not visible therefore senses cannot take part in their decisions.
    ~Linda E.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What other examples can you think of? What about other AOK? History? Other science applications? Math? The Arts/

      Delete
  7. 1. Knowledge should be based on a combination of both experience and authority. Experience should weigh more heavily than authority however because when a person relies on only authority to learn they begin to not think for themselves. I believe that the characters were not thinking for them selves and wanted to defend the only thing that they "knew" to be true.
    2. Some knowledge issues that arise are What should be the basis for our knowledge?&What form of evidence is more reliabe?
    3. One example that I can give is in the book Night by Elie Weisel, a member of the community tried to warn the people about the concentration camps, but the people in the town did not want to listen because what they were being told was that they were being protected from the war. This connects to Galeilo because the people of the town trusted the authority over someones observations

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. #1 gave me more insight, I agree because when one is still adjusting to what they understand as a knower this is a reliance on authority.
      The knowledge issues in #2 are intense and mind-boggling! Where should we extract our information from? Where did our pre-existing information come from? Who is to say authority overrules experience?
      #3 is a a good connection. Now that I've realized people are always battling with the knowledge obtained from authority vs. that gained from experience. Where does on draw the line.

      *overall these were very good observations with proper justification

      -Stella

      Delete
  8. 1) Knowledge should be based on evidence of the senses. In relation to the text, the ancients (the authority) believed that it was impossible for constellations to orbit or have any complex motion for that matter, other than the earth. Through observations (sense of sight through telescope), Galileo discovered otherwise, presenting a different theory and starts questioning the validility of such a theory. This relates to knowledge through personal experience as well. As knowers, we aquire knowledge best through experience of our senses. In my opinion, personal experience is a more reliable source than a book that could contain bias. This way, we gain better understanding.

    2) Knowledge issues that arise:
    -Is Galileo really a knower of this situation? (Belief is a large portion of knowledge, and there wasn't much belief from Galileo)
    -What evidence is there to back Aritsole's theory, and why is he heavily validated? Is it because of his authority?
    -Why do people ignore what could be the truth because it may be outside of the pattern of society?

    3) Examples similar to Galileo's plight are "Mouse ate the Cheese" story. In that story, the owner of the house was in denial about a mouse even being in his house. He was stuck in his own ignorance and refused to open his mind to another possiblity that he may be wrong. He ignored what might have been the truth. Just as in that story, in the Galileo story, when he presented his possibility, the people kept themselves restrained to their ignorance and their ignorance was the theories and works of Artisole. Instead of people being open-minded knowers as the people who presented their observations, they stick to their own and/or society's ignorance.

    -Aaliyah!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The personal experience was looking through his telescope. Why didn't they believe that? Think about the last statement made in the excerpt.

      Delete
    2. I agree with your statement that knowledge should be obtained through one's five senses and not through authority. However, I do believe that authority is there in a sense to help guide us into the right direction, but one must see the truth for themselves. For example, teachers and parents can always tell a child to not smoke, that it is bad for their health. But the child does not truly know or understand WHY smoking is bad for their health until seeing one who has made the choice to continue smoking. This is a personal example for me, where I truly understood the dangers of smoking when I saw a family relative gradually lead themself to respiratory failure by continuing to smoke. It was then that I truly learned what I was told by authority, but through the five senses. Would you agree?
      --Josh

      Delete
    3. Nathaniel

      I agree with your statement. Open-mindedness is a huge way we gain knowledge. Like you said, our own personal ignorance will stand in the way of looking past "what we know" and start looking at new and different points.

      Delete
  9. I believe most knowledge should be based on the senses because most things known by using the sense. For examples, to know something is blue you have to "see" it. To know something is sented like peaches yout have to "smell"
    But somethings are just common sense where as you do not need your senses to have knowledge.

    Should you trust your own self or should you rely on someone elses work. Should you use your senses or use history.

    When someone has passed away how do you really know they are in a good place? Do you really know they are in heaven? Maybe in hell? How do you know if yu cant "see" them?

    Traje'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You you are telling me that your senses cannot deceive you?

      Delete
    2. Senses do also come from your knowlegde, in order to know, as you said something is blue thier had to be evidence in aquring that particular color. But what about those people whom are color blind, what exactly can you say about them

      Youto

      Delete
    3. Traje, you must remember that the sense of feelings towards the spiritual wellbeing are simply based on faith and believe. Not necessarily a religious thing, but simply what was going on with that person before their passing for you to be sure they are in the place you speak of? It is obvious that you cannot provide your 5 senses to this type of situation, however like I said in my post you can provide your sense of awareness to the situation. For example, were they sick, were they depressed, were they doing bad deeds? Were they doing things to straighten up their life or were they wasting it away? Just food for thought...



      Benay

      Delete
  10. 1. Knowledge should be based on both authority and the evidence of the senses. Knowledge is gained through what others tell you, along with what you experience in life. Before you know anything, something's told to you. It's your job to take what's being told to you and change that into your own spin on it. Personal experiences are also the basis of knowledge because you go through certain situations and LEARN from them which make you a better person.
    2. Knowledge issues like mathematical, analytical thinking v. psychological thinking arose. Also, questioning whether the starts existed was a knowledge issue because it made Galileo have to support his beliefs.
    3. I would like to think of myself as the philosopher and the mathematician in this situation because I'm always questioning people and beliefs that I "believe" in. For example, I often question one of my friends about the Bible. I ask a lot of questions and am often looking for proof to things that are supposedly answered.

    -Ihu

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your own "spin" could be perceived as bias don't you think?

      Delete
  11. Knowledge should be based on authority of the evidence of the senses, for this is how information is gathered. Long ago when scientists would record their observation they would list the behavior they saw, what they felt, heard, tasted, and smelt. This is the only way we (humans) are able to interact with our surrounding and extract knowledge. Then you can use the existing can modify/ clarify it as the times advance. In this excerpt a knowledge issue that may arise is "are facts made to support a knowers theory" and if so "does it apply to past knowers and their dated theories even when facts made change/modify." A connection to Galileo's plight would be the belief of God during the life of Jesus Christ. Many of the Jews saw the miracles and works of Jesus Christ, heard the words of his forerunner John the Baptist and yet still refused to believe based on the "facts" of other knowers and preconceived thoughts.

    *Stella

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Then why did the folks that looked through the telescope disbelieve their eyes?

      Delete
  12. Esther

    Yes knowledge should be based on the authority of the evidence of the senses because even investiagating crime scences scientist use there senses to in order for the to try in catch the killer . Our sense should weigh more then just authority. Our sense can deceive us so our authourity and sense contribut to us have knowledge.

    Knowlegde Issues that arose is 1. Who or what ca nwe trust to provided with right(truthful) knowledge. 2. Just because a theory is tested over and over again does it later become false?

    An example simila tO Galileo plight is May 21,2011 A men Harold said God was coming. http://ireadmex.com/2011/05/is-jesus-coming-back-on-may-21st-2011-usa-movement-says-yes/

    People sold their houses quit their job but there still here. I would have beleive if I did not know ( read in the bible) that God said no one knows even the angels, and he said he would come like a thief at night.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with that knowledge should be based on the evidence of the senses but when is it more valid than authority if perception differs between people adding bias. When we were doing the lab in science involving a crime each group had a different take on the murder of Mr.Scott and the reasoning behind it

      -Brittney

      Delete
    2. william

      In terms of how knowledge should be based on the evidence of the senses, I agree. If we don't have a valid way of proving a claim, such as using our five senses, then how trustworthy can the claim itself be? As for the Knowledge Issues, for #1, I don't think it is possible to have a sovereign source of answers to everything because many people will want to refute it and make their own claims.

      Delete
  13. 1. Knowledge should not just be made on the authority of the senses because they are not always 100% accurate. If knowledge was simply based on senses it would discount religion and other personal beliefs that can not be perceived through sight, hearing, or touching. On the other hand I think that knowledge should be based on evidence perceived through the senses because more often than not it is easily proven.

    2.To what extent does personal beliefs hinder the pursuit of knowledge?
    What made Galileo's discovery any less valid than Aristotle's?

    3. When I was accused of stealing money even though, there was no proof that I had done so. I repeatedly said that it was not me, but because I was the last person near the bag it was deduced that I must have taken it. Some people believed me because of my relationship with them while other did not because of their relationship with the accuser.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think that knowledge should be based on our own 5 senses. For one thing, authoritative figures are never right all the time. Thanks to modern technology, old ideas are being challenged and replaced with new ones at an increasingly rapid rate. Also, relying on one's senses eliminates the chance of falling for authority worship. If the great scientists of the past never trusted their own senses, our world would be very different: the vast majority of our modern-day conviences would simply not exist, and many modern scientific ideas would still be a myth today.
    Here is one possible knowledge issue: What is it about authority that makes it appear to be a failsafe way of acquiring knowledge and truth?
    In the play "Life of Galileo", there were people who clung to the old Ptolemaic way of seeing things and who refused to listen to Galileo's new way of seeing things. When Geologist Alfred Wagener proposed his theory that continents can move, he was rejected outright by all of his "contemporaries" who believed that continents could not move. They refused to see through Wagener's eyes and they wanted to only see their own point of view. In the end, however, just as it was discovered that Earth does revolve around the Sun, it was found that continents do move around.
    --Michael

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you about saying knowledge being based on our 5 senses but what about the fact that authoritative figures have knowledge also and that their knowledge could be used as a basics of what not to follow.Some authoritative leaders have good knowledge that imply to our beliefs that we think are knowledgeable. For example rules from foreign authorities can give you knowledge from getting hurt in another country right.
      --Guyvin

      Delete
    2. I agree with Guyvin comparing it to Ants because if you never get out of a place you never know what you are missing or what could be better. The ants never stood up for themselves because they thought the bees were at the top of the food chain but when they all united they were able to take them out of there territory.

      Delete
    3. Any comment by Paige

      Delete

  15. a)I think it should be a combination of both because the knowledge from the authority eventually came from somewhere,you cant keep question everything you here and read but there should be something to back up the information. Knowledge from authority could be biased at times but I think its more likely to be true than not otherwise majority of the stuff around us would be hectic. For example one could chose to question why certain objects are given certain names like questioning why a cup is called a cup and not called a spoon but at some point questioning it is pointless and you have no choice but to accept it as it is.The same applies for history none of us were really there and there is different interpretations of what happened but eventually we are forced to accept whatever we are told as it is and I think that plays into our sense perception because we all interpret information differently but a combination of both authority and our senses should be more dependable.
    b)Knowledge issues that arised
    -Why was the mathematician and philosopher so closed up to not experiencing something new and different for themselves, other than what they've been told?....why do the rely so much on Aristotle's views and are not open minded to gain their own knowledge?
    c)An example I think is similar to Galileo's plight is some adults expecting us teens to not question what they tell us. I've ran into the same situation with one too many adults who expected me to blindly accept what they just told me and get offended when I ask why. I feel as though it shouldn't be a problem for someone to respectfully ask why when they need more information about something instead of blindly doing it.
    Jayeon

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do Agree with you jayeon, knowledge from authority can be biased at times.
      JR

      Delete
  16. 1. Knowledge should be based on the Authority and the evidence of our senses because both could deceive you in the wrong way. What is meant by that is Authority could be the knowledge of going off what one beliefs and not really be open to other things.Our senses could deceive because what we may see,hear,taste,touch,and smell might be alter by numerous of factors. Knowledge should be gained through Authority and the evidence of our senses as a counterpart between the two because Authority can give you a template of what there is that you might learn and our senses may give you the knowledge to alter what you learned from the authority knowledge.

    The Knowledge Issue developed from the Excerpt is

    2.If our Ignorance is limitless than why do we continue to gain knowledge?

    3.The part in the movie "ANTS" when others thought that there was no utopia outside of their colony because the leader of the colonies never allowed them to go outside the colony.But when the Ant goes outside the colony to what he think is utopia he realizes that something terrible is going to happen to the colony but know one believes him because he's not the Authority and know one else has been outside the colony but him and a few others.
    --Guyvin

    ReplyDelete
  17. 1. I think that knowledge should be based on the senses. The authority can pass on their ideas/thoughts as true, but they will never really now. Now that science has become more advanced, theories such as the ones Galileo made can be justified/supported. You can't believe everything you hear. In the excerpt, the ancients thought that everything Galileo was telling them was impossible. Even though Galileo had seen it with his own eyes, they did not believe his judgement. His findings went against what the ancients had been taught for hundreds of years; it went against what they thought they knew. I think that we learn better through our senses. Learning through our senses can create bias, but if we read books, we are just reading the author's bias. People should be open-minded, therefore they can acknowledge other ideas and thoughts without saying that they are impossible and just write them off like the ancients did.

    2. How do personal experiences and beliefs affect the way people seek information?
    How can we differentiate between good information from bad information; how do we know which one to believe?

    3. Once I was invited to a hotel birthday party, and I ended up locking the whole party out of one of the rooms. I didn't want to speak up and get in trouble, so I acted like I didn't do it and let someone else take the blame. My friends parents (the authority) blamed the cousin for doing it based on prior incidents that had occurred. One might think that the authority know more than the average person because of their position. In reality, they could be just as clueless as everyone else. This reminded me of the book "Perfume: The Story of a Murder" by Patrick Suskind. Grenouille the main character of the book had killed many women just for their scents and got away with it. When he was eventually caught and put before the death penalty, the people decided to let him go because they sensed that he was innocent. They then decided to kill a truly innocent man because of his mannerisms. The authority convicted a man just so they could get the case over with, and move on with their lives. So how can you trust the authority or your senses when they can both deceive you?

    -- Kayla

    ReplyDelete
  18. 1. Should knowledge be based on authority or the evidence of the senses?

    I believe knowledge should be based on both the evidence of our senses and Authoritative figures. Knowledge is acquired through both our senses and from what people tell us. Though knowledge can be based on authority we shouldn't limit ourselves to that area only because everyone has their own personal bias, so do the Authoritative figures. We should trust better our senses than the Authoritative figures ideas because theirs too can be susceptible to flaw.

    2. What knowledge issues arise in the excerpt? (refer to KI brochure)
    -Can the fear of disputing an authority forces one to distrust their senses?

    3. What other examples can you think of that are similar to Galileo's plight?

    The Milgram experiment on peoples obedience to authority figures, where Milgram gathered people and the participant was paired with another person.the participant was always the teacher, and the learner was one of Milgram’s confederates (pretending to be a real participant). The instructions were to administer a shock to the learner each time they got a question wrong and to increase the voltage after each shock. The purpose of the experiment was to test how obedient people were to authority figures, as each time the man in a white coat (authority) encouraged the participants to administer the shock most did.
    animated explanation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L-hKsjGP1M

    **Belleh

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. EXACTLY. I totally agree. Everyone has bias because the knowledge we give, in form of information, are sometimes according to our perceptions; even the authorities. Although, I disagree with the part you said, "We should trust better our senses than the Authoritative figures ideas because theirs to can be susceptible to flaw." That is because sometimes, we consider authorities as authorities because they have better knowledge than we do in some ways. They at least have wider range of knowledge than we do, or their range of knowledge are in different aspects and our range of knowledge are in different aspects of life.

      ❧Lovely

      Delete
    2. Belleh, thanks for including the link!!

      Delete
  19. William

    The acceptance of knowledge is a very complex issue, because there many ways to prove an answer however there are only so many that are actually valid as truths. To use our senses is itself a very valid way to prove any bit of knowledge, since each and every sense we use challenges the question and information at hand. The entire reason for my comment is itself an example of why knowledge should be based on authority of the evidence of the senses. Since I saw and read the excerpt of the story "Life of Galileo", I am now acknowledging the information and the existence of the story and the question at hand.

    Knowledge Issue- How far can personal feelings get in the way of obtaining and accepting knowledge from another person. (It seemed to me that the Philosopher and the Mathematician both had some kind of background feelings against Galileo's theories.)

    This scenario in the story is actually a usual event in the lives of many scientist that find "break-through's" in the field that they claim. In the introduction to the Microscope, many people would find it difficult to actually agree with what they are seeing, however, the status quote of our time indicate that the images that are shown are indeed what is in real life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that people believe images are absolute facts. In this day and age images are used to influence people's perspectives and mislead them especially with the use of photoshop and social media.

      - Jazmine A.

      Delete
  20. 1. Knowledge should not be limited to just one thing. Although, using your senses to experience and acquire knowledge is very important, it should not be the only way to base evidence. Knowledge is when a person is willing to question their beliefs and step away from the authority and find answers by themselves. It is easy to stick to what you've been taught all your life rather than question the very senses that you use to guide you everyday.

    2. Some knowledge issues that arise in the excerpt is:
    • Can your eyes deceive you?
    • Should knowledge be based solely on what we have been taught
    • Is knowledge absolute or relative?
    3. An example that is similar to Galileo's plight because he just simply thought if they looked through his telescope then all their questions would be answered. As if to say seeing it makes it fact. As an impressionable teenager many adults just tell us to look through their eyes instead of ours. They encourage us to look at their way of thinking because we were taught to believe that with age comes knowledge.

    - Jazmine A.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with how you view knowlege. However, if a person is too step away from authority and find answers for themselves, what will they have to base these "newfound answers" off of? How will they even know they have come across the answer? Also what example was similar to Galileo's plight I don't understand what you wrote

      -Elijah J.

      Delete
  21. 1) Knowledge should be based off of the evidence of our own senses and analyzation rather than accepting anything and everything we hear from what is above us. As infants, we find ourselves force-fed a handful of morals and cultures that are specific to the family we are born into. However, we do not learn most of these ideals simply through speech. Although a parent might tell us these cultures and traditions, it is through seeing these actions that we, as children, mimic what is in front of us. It is not that some parents tell their children to cuss that some learn foul language at a young age, but it is through hearing firsthand those around them saying the same, and following in suit. Knowledge should not be obtained by what we're told, rather by what we see, and then asking ourselves if we want to believe this or do it, or not.

    2. How can Galileo know that what he sees in through his telescope is, in actuality, really up there in space?? This knowledge issue questions the reliability of the very instrument that Galileo is using. How can he, and many of the other astronomers of their time, simply place their trust in a man-made instrument when man itself is not reliable and consistent?

    3)This question leads us to question everything else we use, and other theories we have developed as "man." These same instruments and theories we believe ever so truly today are usually altered and improved tomorrow, just as it was yesterday. For example, the atomic theory has evolved over many years. Dalton made the public believe the atom was simply a ball similar to a pool ball. Thomson changed the public's idea, stating that the structure was now more similar to that of a positively charged pool ball with negatively charged dots. Theory after theory, change after change, we have come to the conclusion that the structure of an atom consists of neutrons and protons that are surrounded by a negatively charged cloud of electrons. But how do we know this theory is also false? Just like the plight of Galileo, how can we truly place our trust in instruments and theories that can be altered or labelled as "obsolete" ever so quickly?
    --Josh

    ReplyDelete
  22. Nathaniel

    1. Yes. I believe knowledge should be based on things that we hear ourselves, see, what we can taste, and feel and smell. If one experiences the things that they observe or feel on their own then one can make an assumption that what they saw/heard is indeed the case. But, we can be deceived by our senses. For example, because someone already has a feeling of hate toward someone then what they hear is always going to be negative because they already made up in their mind that they hate that person.

    2.
    -Can knowledge only be shown through the senses?
    -Should one question what knowledge they have gained through the senses or trust the instincts that were given to them through there senses?

    3. For example, people have their own opinions about how events may happen. These opinions may come from their bias towards that person, their past experiences and so forth. If someone sees Rachel steal from a store and this person knows that Rachel did steal once before in their life, then this person is going to believe that Rachel stole from that store even though maybe Rachel really didn't steal. The person's own feeling about Rachel is the reason why Rachel will get accused.

    ReplyDelete
  23. 1)Knowledge should certainly be considered based on authority but it should also be questioned. As knowers, it is our job to question everything that we come across and try to give our own personal take on the pertaining situation. Knowledge should not simply be acquired through evidence of the senses either because the senses can be deceiving at times and can not be trusted. For example, many people might agree that they only choose to believe something once they see it. But then again, what is seen with the physical eye is not always the truth and can be deceiving as well.

    2)-Can anything truly be proven?
    -If so, what determines good evidence?
    -Do higher authorities have the right to not be questioned?
    -Can knowledge be entirely based on what is seen?

    3) A example that relates to Galileo's plight are when there are claims that UFOs are spotted roaming the skies. Video evidence has been provided on numerous occasions where flying objects could not be identified. Certain people attempt to use these types of visual evidence to prove their claims that extra terrestrials have been seen on Earth. And although, there is the visual evidence, people still do not fully believe that the flying objects were indeed ETs. This relates to Galileo's plight because he was trying to prove a point with the visual evidence that he had. This goes to show that the senses are not always trusted when acquiring knowledge because people still tend to question things even when there is evidence provided.
    -JAMES

    ReplyDelete
  24. Knowledge cannot be limited to one thing or else knowledge would be confined to only one area. While using your senses is important to gaining knowledge, physical senses are often decieved. This can be proved by almost any magician. In the story of Galileo the mathmetician and philosopher there was a question of whether Galileo's telescope created an illusion of the solar system. The matmetician wanted more than to see(senses)how the solar system was alligned but he wanted a logical explaination(evidence), that was separate of sense, to state why Aristole was wrong.

    2.Some knowledge issuess that arise from the excerpt are
    Can the senses be trusted?
    Can only evidence separate of the senses be trusted
    Should knowledge only be based of the ideas and observations of others?
    3. An example similar to Galileo's would be a student trying to explain to a teacher why he/she cannot find their locker and put their stuff in it. The teacher sees (sense) most of the student's belongings with them but since the rest of the class has their stuff put away in lockers and the fact that she has been taught that not only are the lockers are big enough to support all items necessary for school but that all students should have a locker, know where it is and know its combination (taught and supported by someone other than the teacher, therefore making this evidence separate of her own senses). Based on this she refuses to acknowledge the fact that the student cannot find their locker and put their stuff in it even though she sees(sense)the student has burdened themselves with carrying all their belongings and the strain it causes to the student(senses).

    - Elijah Johnson

    ReplyDelete
  25. 1) Should knowledge be based on authority or the evidence of the senses?
    I think that there should be a combination just to be exact with our answers. In my perspective, when I acknowledge information, I primarily reflect to myself whether I agree or disagree according to my own experiences, bias, perception. For example, when I heard that living organisms have characteristics of living with water, air, and light, I observe that by myself first. Plants outside my house (garden) grow on a daily basis as they get natural rain, air, and light. However, I didn’t exactly know how plants get water, air, or light until knowledge of plants’ structures was obtained through textbooks, research, teachers, or scientists. Therefore, knowledge as it is based on evidence of the senses can be proved with knowledge based on authority (of textbooks and/or scientists, technology, research, etc.) In addition, what is really important is how strong, accurate, efficient that obtained knowledge is through its resources. Moreover, in Galileo's plight, he could have at least connected his senses to Aristotle's claims rather than completely ignore them.

    2) What knowledge issues arise in the excerpt?
    • How accurate can our senses be when it comes to using it as evidence?
    • How useful can knowledge based on authority be when it gets to debates?

    3) What other examples can you think of that are similar to Galileo's plight?
    When I was researching for my Biology extended essay topic, I allowed myself to get intimidated by the titles of the topics on first sight. I didn't perceive through some topics that were actually easier than they sounded. For example, one research topic was "The Effect of Fluorescent Light on the Efficiency of
    Lactic Acid Bacteria in Milk Fermentation." I thought it was difficult in terms of researching and hands-on experiments, but it's rather simple in terms of the materials and procedures.


    ❧LOVELY

    ReplyDelete
  26. 1. I think knowledge shouldn't be based off either. Just because you have authority doesn't mean your knowledge is any better than anyone elses. People's senses tend to steer them in the wrong direction to make them go towards what they are feelings. We really don't know what knowledge to trust because we cannot be certain what we is true and isn't. But at the same time our knowledge is both acquired from authority and or senses so we can get it from either. I tend to get my knowledge from both but get confused on when I should use that knowledge to help me in my everyday life.

    2. What knowledge arise from the excerpt?
    Issues arising from the excerpt is not knowing where to gain knowledge from. I can relate to this because I have a hard time trying to figure out where to gain my knowledge from and if it's the right knowledge I should follow.

    3. A similar example to Galiliio's plight is when Galileo excepted the awkwardness of such motions but wasn't able to predict the position of starts like they were suppose to. Now a days teens accept anything that they feel will make them seem cool but really isn't proven to and ends up making them look stupid.

    -Paige D

    ReplyDelete
  27. Knowledge shouldn't be based on authority of evidence of the senses. Knowledge should be based on experience. Although we gain knowledge through different sources, ultimately those knowledge you learned was gain through experience. When we speak of experience, it's in terms of making mistakes and correcting those mistakes by trying other solutions. However our senses are very deceiving and in the words of the "ghetto boys" the sometimes play tricks on us. We claim to hear, see and feel things that doesn't exist. Our senses are often time control by our emotions and our emotions are unstable and unreliable. I personally
    believe in rationality, reason and factual proofs. Those are the qualities that knowledge should be based on not senses

    Several issues rise this excerpt. First is the belief in others, shouldn't we want to experience and see knowledge ourself than living in someone else's words. And the issue of open-mindedness (not sure if it's on the chart). The philosophers refusal just to take a look, he refused to challenged what he has believed in for so many years.

    Another example would be the ridiculous notion that rap mogul jay z and hip hop finiest kanye west both worship the devil and are in the illuminate in exchange for fame and fortune. People are so blinded by their clever and sarcastic word play, that they miss the truth. They also refuse to see that, they are buying into "The Throne" plot to constantly stay relevant. Their so set on the fact that they sold their soul to the devil for fame that refuse to see the hard work that the rappers put into their work to accomplish their fame and fortune.
    Junior

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for posting!!

Swift