Welcome back after spring break! I took mine last week, as did most of you, and I ended up staying at home for the most part, it was definitely a relaxing week. I wanted to summarize the research I have done so far as well as my plans for the second half of the Senior Research Project. As you all know, I am looking into what kinds of knowledge are necessary and the different kinds of arguments that can justify why these pieces of knowledge should even be deemed necessary in the first place. I have limited this question to just democratic societies, as is relevant to the country we are living in, and the majority of countries around the world.
What I should make a distinction in, and I haven't yet done so, is that I have only researched into 'knowledge' so far, and within philosophy, this definition refers to information that is true or correct. Meaning I have only analyzed methods in which we can judge knowledge as opposed to actual false information. As such, my plan for the next few weeks is to analyze the different arguments for things such as 'hate speech' or false information to be deemed as necessary. Off the bat, we would think false information is unnecessary within a democratic society, but Mill is one example that seems to disagree with this, as seen through the harm principle, and I wish to explore this theory with other philosophers.
As for now, the primary acceptable theories to judge the relevance and need of certain types of knowledge are actionability, and happiness. These two differ, in that a piece of knowledge is relevant if it increases your overall happiness and vice versa. This is the same with actionability, in that the more actionable a type of knowledge is, the more relevant and possibly necessary it is. And these two theories will often not lead to the same answer. For example, if your spouse was cheating on you, and you didn't know, would you like to know or find out if you were in that situation? The actionability theory would suggest you should learn that piece of information, yet because this knowledge would decrease your overall happiness, the theory of happiness would deem this piece of information as unnecessary.
Anyways, that's all for this week! I hope you guys had an awesome break and see you next week!
Hi Liam! I found your example really helpful when you described the two theories. Could you continue to include examples each week to help us understand the different theories. It might also be nice to include in your final presentation! Now that you are done with Week 6 of your project, has your interest in philosophy grown or diminished?
ReplyDeleteHi Ms. Conner! I will continue to provide examples, they are the primary way my professor will explain things to me and the main way for me to make sense of these concepts. My interest in philosophy has stayed consistent I would say, it's still just as interesting as it was prior to the project.
DeleteDang Liam, you always bring up concepts that I had never expected. I am really excited to hear more in more blog posts. Not sure if you are supposed to think about it this way, but is there one theory that you personally agree with more?
ReplyDeleteHi Luke! Personally, I prefer the happiness theory, but I would not use it for every situation, that being said, I am worried more about my well-being rather than the actions I can derive from knowing something. Thank you!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTwo things.
ReplyDeleteFirst, why limit your question to democratic societies? Aren't there kinds of knowledge which we need simply by virtue of our being human beings, regardless of what kind of societies we happen to live in? If so, wouldn't these kinds of knowledge be at the very heart of your research question?
Second, you can probably save yourself some time by not asking whether false information is "necessary." Remember, your research question is what types of knowledge are necessary. If it isn't knowledge, it can't be necessary knowledge. And false information is, by definition, not knowledge. With some caveats, philosophers define knowledge as justified, true belief. If it isn't true, it isn't knowledge.
Hi Mr. Lambert, the primary reason for why I limit my question to just democratic societies is because they are more prevalent, as well as, more familiar to us. What I mean by this is that with the study of another society could come a completely different set of values, and this changes the answer to my research question. For what we could deem necessary is different from another society. Our knowledge-based needs change based on the society. For example, we need the knowledge of how to drive to go to the store for food, whereas individuals in other societies may need to know how to hunt to acquire food. The basic need is the same, but the means of fulfilling that need is different. I do agree with you, but I hope to research it further because Mill believed that even false information was necessary, and I would like to analyze the arguments for why that could or could not be true.
DeleteHi Liam! I find it very interesting that you are relating knowledge to things as broad as hate speech. I am interested in the results of your research.
ReplyDeleteHi Cole! Thank you!
DeleteHello again Liam, Welcome back. I have a question on why you would leave your parameters to just democratic societies. Wouldn't it be better keep it to all civilizations for a better argument on what knowledge is necessary.
ReplyDeleteHi Akash! I am reducing my boundaries within the project to just democratic societies because the values of a society can change massively, and therefore they would have different answers as to what they deem necessary. For example, in a hunting culture, you are concerned so much with happiness as you are survival. By limiting my project to just democratic societies, it is more relevant to us, without having to study so many other social structures.
DeleteHi Liam! That's interesting! What sort of knowledge do you think is necessary even if it does not make you happy?
ReplyDeleteHi Aditya! The knowledge of future tests within school may not make you happy, but they are almost certainly necessary.
DeleteHey Liam! This is pretty cool. I never thought about looking at the other end, that is, false information? Also wondering, how would secrets be incorporated into your research? I can imagine someone keeping a secret for someone else, even though there may be no actionability and increase in happiness keeping the information a secret? I don't know, just a thought. Keep up the good work!
ReplyDeleteHi Adam! That is actually very interesting, as I have not explored secrets yet, and they are certainly knowledge that could be deemed necessary in some situations. I will explore this route! Thank you!
DeleteWow! I didn't even think about knowledge only extending to true and accepted facts. I really look forward to reading your analysis of false and hate speech. Thanks for the information about the two theories and the example.
ReplyDeleteHi Ziba! Thank you!
DeleteHi Liam! It's so interesting to see that you're examining false information and incorporating that into your research. I find it's especially in our day and age with "alternative facts" apparently becoming more acceptable.
ReplyDeleteHi Nichole! There is also the whole idea of false information being spread through news outlets, so I thought I would incorporate this into my research.
DeleteHey Liam! Not going to lie, I didn't completely understand what you meant until I read the example that you gave. It's really cool to think that a situation could be judged completely different based on those two theories. What would be an example of a situation in which accountability and happiness theories would both say a piece of information is necessary? Great post!
ReplyDeleteHi Urmi! Thank you! An example in which both theories deem knowledge as necessary would be the knowledge of how to get food. Usually the answer to that is just go to Walmart, but this knowledge increases both your well-being and it is very actionable.
DeleteHi Liam! I found your take on false information as potentially useful to be really interesting. If I am correct, it could be seen as necessary if it increases one's overall happiness. Based on this, would you argue that actionability is the more important factor on whether knowledge should be acquisitioned because it results in less false information? I'm interested to hear your response, and best of luck with the rest of your research!
ReplyDeleteHi Nicolas! Unfortunately I don't quite understand your question, both actionability and happiness can be the result of false information, so I'm not sure. Thank you!
DeleteIntresting, I agree with Akash Kuppravalli, would it not be more efficient to keep it to all societies rather than just democratic ones
ReplyDeleteHi Garik! I don't think so, because what comes with studying all societies is a complete change in the things we value most. Our society values happiness and actionability, whereas other societies have different values.
Delete