p.p1 to shared knowledge from the people around

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000}
p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 13.0px}
span.s1 {font-kerning: none}
span.s2 {font: 7.3px Helvetica; font-kerning: none}
span.s3 {font-kerning: none; color: #942193; -webkit-text-stroke: 0px #942193}

Born in a conservative Indian society, ‘disagreement’ did not play a big role in my life as a child. My formative years were spent in a house governed by rules which were not to be disagreed upon. Consensus, on the hand, seemed to be woven in almost every facet of my life; social, cultural and religious norms were defined with a general consensus amongst most people. 
But I as grew older, I was greatly influenced by the people i met- be it friends and teachers at school or neighbours and relatives. the knowledge that I began to acquire clashed with my existing personal knowledge which had come as a part of my family. I began to understand the importance of disagreement- be it in a simple discussion with my parents about appropriate dressing.
This exposure to shared knowledge from the people around me, from my education and experiences helped shape and modify my personal knowledge. 
Imbibing the quality of consensus and disagreement, my personal knowledge became more robust- I began to see that the ever-changing world around us is build on multidimensional and dynamic systems that necessitate knowing and understanding through multiple claims and counterclaims. Only consensus enhances existing knowledge and information by reinterpreting same or simliar facts, , but with disagreement there is room for scrutiny- to investigate, reflect, reexamine and produce knowledge that rests on a well-balanced and robust foundation. 

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

When these words- robust knowledge consensus and disagreement- are stringed together they can manifest differently in the different areas of knowledge. In this essay I will be exploring the extent to which robust knowledge requires consensus and disagreement, with respect to Natural Science and Religious Knowledge Systems.

Natural Science is an area of knowledge that revolves around the understanding of the physical world- that is physics, chemistry, geology and biology. Largely based on observations of the real world, knowledge in the natural sciences is constructed using reason, intuition ans sense perceptionWhile reason is a prime requirement for inductive reasoning to produce generalised statements or scientific laws, intuition and sense perception is often used for the creation of hypotheses that are proved or disproved. 
Furthermore, robustness in natural science can be understood as knowledge that can survive sustained criticism; theories and principles in natural science call for a general consensus among scholars of the scientific community based on their observations, investigations and experiments. 
However the knowledge that is produced, only becomes consistent and reproducible, and thus robust, when it is subjected to counterclaims and disagreement in order to leave room for further investigation, analysis and exploration. Thus, with the amalgamation of claims and counterclaims the knowledge produced in the natural sciences is robust.


I'm Barry!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out