Does the completeness of knowledge recede from view the more we learn? As new fields of study open, whole new arrays of problems present themselves. For example, the development of electronic digital computing machines raised theoretical and technical questions about algorithms, algorithmic efficiencies, design issues and so on. The ironic result might be that as human society acquires new ideas, the possibility that human society can collectively know almost everything there is to know recedes from view. Back to the question: is the rate of what can be known increasing faster than human society can find out about what can be known?
" .. is the rate of what can be known increasing faster than human society can find out about what can be known?" Yes. Every answered question raises at least two new questions.
O conhecimento evolui do sensível para o inteligível. Dentro desse contexto, quanto mais sabemos, mais perguntas também fazemos, porque novos leques de problemas e/ou de possibilidades também surgem para nós. Em outras palavras, como já dizia KANT, "todo conhecimento começa com a experiência, mas nem todo conhecimento se origina ou se dá a partir da experiência".
I think that more superficial knowledge has been spreading widely in recent times & I also think that this trend will carry on as knowledge advances. The human mind cannot cope well with the huge rate of influx of knowledge if there is the unrealistic aim of grasping each information in-depth.
In my field, chemistry, some of my old teachers (in the undergraduate level) were taught chemistry topics from relatively large textbooks so each one of them was truly knowledgeable in the 4 basic branches of chemistry.
At the postgraduate level, in the late 1970s & early 1980s, my distinguished professors were divided: one of them told me that I have to be responsible for anything called chemistry (!) while another one told me this wisdom " Current research, then, is to know more & more about less & less". I think that a reasonable realistic formula lies in between with mastering knowledge in one's specialization while acquiring "scattered" knowledge in close fields & other subjects, in general.
" .. is the rate of what can be known increasing faster than human society can find out about what can be known?" Yes. Every answered question raises at least two new questions.
Robert, on this:
The ironic result might be that as human society acquires new ideas, the possibility that human society can collectively know almost everything there is to know recedes from view.
I would say that the more anyone knows, the more they realize how much they don't know. So that alone means that the more we learn, even as individuals, the more absurd any ideas of "knowing everything" will become. "Collectively" should not change this.
Without proof, my thinking is that the vastness of the unknown is growing far faster than our knowledge base. It's more than just peeling the onion. It's more like, every layer you peel off reveals far more complicated layers underneath.
On the related topic, unless we greatly increase the number of years people dedicate to pure education, or unless we invent far more efficient ways of transferring knowledge into human brains, it is inevitable that individual knowledge is becoming more specialized. The effect in academic curricula is quite obvious. My father would complain about our lack of study of ancient Greek and philosophy. These were staples, once upon a time.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology
- Mental Processes
- Learning