Special Offer!Pay less for your papers
Get 15% off your first order
|← Research Question||Curriculum Mapping →|
Many of the people have a single base in subjectivism, which is the principle that all knowledge is simply subjective, meaning that nothing is more than anyone’s opinion and that purposeful knowledge is not possible. Most of the people believe in bogus notion that science is all about knowledge, while on the other side philosophy is all about opinions. The paper will seek to explain the following quote, Virtue is true opinion; True opinion is as good as knowledge.
As illustrated by Plato, virtue is true opinion, while opinion is neither knowledge nor ignorance but something between the two. To know anything as accurate is to know it as it is, therefore knowledge abides upon what is, that is, its purpose is being (George & Laurence, 2003). To stand still with an opinion is to make a decision that might not or might match to what really is. Hence, virtue is the opinion that bears upon what maybe in the case, while to be uninformed or ignorant about something is having the lack of knowledge.
Moreover, knowledge is generalized by need or want. It is not our opinion that 1+1=2, or that Edwin is a mortal because all men are mortal, and Edwin is a man. We all know that this inference is true, for the have a force of need. But if for instance I was to interview a man for 20 minutes and come up with a conclusion that he could be a good manager, that conclusion would be no more than an opinion. My decision could be incorrect. Thus, a good opinion is characterization of a possibility. According to Plato a little manifestation will illustrate that not every opinion is as convincing as any other opinion (George & Laurence, 2003). For example your father opinion would be that you cannot make a good manager. Whose opinion is good? The preferred answer to this question is: the one with adequate information to support the query. Your father knows you better that I do as he knows how you handles different situations. He clearly knows how you react to situations, stress, etc. Thus our opinion is not evenly valid.
Another vital consideration to keep in mind is, if everything is a matter of one’s view or opinion, as most of the people think, then knowledge do not exist. And if knowledge do not exist then it is impossible to understand what an opinion is, or even to know about everything is all a matter of opinion (Guthrie, 1986). In many circumstances we only know opinion is possibly correct, uncertain or possible mistaken. But for sure if we could not know everything to be correct, certain we would not be in at a position of knowing an opinion in the first place. And so it is basically not correct to say that everything is a matter of opinion, neither is it correct to argue that every opinion is valid as any other.
Consequently, it is not true to argue that science is a matter of knowledge while philosophy is a matter of opinion. This is easy to proof. As it is know, experimental science determines its inference through a sense of experimentation, or sensation. The term “empirical” signify “pertaining to intellect experience” (Debra, 2006). Science needs empirical proof, however we know a mass of things cannot be verified empirically through intellect experimentation. We cannot by any chance verify, through an experiment that “not anything can be and not be at the similar time and in the same respect” (Debra, 2006). Nevertheless we know that this is essential and absolutely true, because so as to declare it incorrect, you would presuppose that is correct. The same is recognized to be correct for the principle indefinable knowledge.
According to Plato knowledge can be extended to include all variable and corrigible opinions that can be emphasized on the basis of knowledge and reasons at particular time which can all cover opinions beyond any rational doubt. It entails opinions that have a prevalence of reason or evidence in their own good turn alongside opinions sustained by a weaker reason or evidence.
Those who argue that they have valuable little knowledge that has such certitude may not realize that little knowledge consists of self-evidence of necessary opinions. But is everything else an opinion? May be yes, or no; yes if we persist the criteria truth known, and incorrigibility; but no if we ignore the criteria and identify them as merely opinions we can assert on the basis of reasons and reasons that have adequate force to validate the truth of the opinion (Kahn, 2004).
In conclusion knowledge is always associated with possessing its truth. Some of the persons who claim to have knowledge are possibly incorrect because they do not have any idea about definitions of opinion and knowledge. opinions are two way such that they can be true or false which is not the case for knowledge .There are distinction between the two ; in knowledge there are things which we can have information beyond any doubt while in opinions we can have a significant degree of skeptics (Kahn, 2004).
Although some of us claim to have knowledge, it is always too hard to dominate in a field .Proof of this can be seen where even the scientific formulations are proven otherwise. Due to this it is important for people to differentiate knowledge from opinions.