1

IB Theory of Knowledge
“We know with confidence only when we know little; with knowledge doubt
increases” (adapted from JW von Goethe)
 2

“We know with confidence only when we know little; with knowledge doubt

increases”

Goethe’s quote suggests that one has confidence in knowledge when he knows a little. As

knowledge increases, it raises more questions which in turn leads to uncertainty. There is an

impartial nature to the argument where we can bask in our ignorance. This statement in part

paints the pursuit for knowledge futile. Alternatively, the case can be made for knowledge

serving as a guiding force towards inquiry that leads to further knowing. What will be explored

is how we acquire knowledge and the nature of its discovery. Does acquiring new knowledge

lead to more questions? Increasing knowledge tells us what we do not know. The statement reads

as ignorance implying definitive knowledge.

The arts do not provide us with knowledge in which we can be confident in. Ideas are

typically presented in abstract form. The knowledge we acquire then proportionally heightens

with knowledge.

I believe the existence of a particular sort of knowledge to be inherent in the arts. Implicitly

creativity is related to art where we cannot create a work of art without being creative.

Independent from all other areas, they can easily be contrasted with all areas of knowledge but

conversely serves as a mediator to other ways of knowing.

First having picked a guitar up was an experience of accumulated emotion and sense

perception. As I began learning guitar, a sense of antagonism towards the structured and

methodologically formulated music school curricula showed. The more I stayed in music school

the more I felt a diminished sense of imagination and creativity. In some sense, I felt that the

curriculum limited me in my knowledge of music. I furthered this learning by self-teaching.

 3

Having learned more across the freely accessible content online. This materialized through

playing my guitar where the more knowledge I had, the more certain I was in my ability of

playing and conceiving ideas through it. The question arises, if art as an area of knowledge is in

itself “imaginary”, can we be reliant on it to provide knowledge?

A counter argument follows; the arts can give us knowledge that the sciences cannot give

us. Typically the first thing that comes to mind in regards to the two areas of knowledge are their

differences. They aim on discovering what is out there and expand on our understanding of

things around us. What puts things into perspective is how the sciences are set in their

methodological, strict, and regulated procedures. This of course leaves a little space for

imagination and creativity. Contrast arises where in some situations the arts can provide us with

the confidence of truth. Tapping into emotion as a way of knowing this way allows us to strongly

believe things and perceive everyday stimuli. Taking music again into example, the first time I

heard Billy Holliday’s Strange Fruit, a strange sort of emotion was evoked in me. It is a song on

20th century racial oppression in which along with the song, an image of two African American’s

being hung in the presence people calmly watching. An example of powerful imagery as such is

a potent tool for obtaining knowledge, specifically through sense perception. As I first listened to

the song having the image in mind, I began to widen my understanding of the historical racial

oppression. Through sense perception I came to believing more strongly into the purely

malevolent nature of human beings in the past. Having this in mind, I can state with confidence

that I know that people were inherently evil in the context of the treatment of the individuals of a

separate race. Can I know how the average African American feels about this? No, I can only

claim to know this. As a link for the title, this is a very good example which supports both claims

in the context of art.

 4

It’s therefore evident that art can assuredly provide us with knowledge to a certain extent. It can

show something to be true typically in a singular approach. On one end we can note that

knowledge cannot be relied on confidently in the scope of music. The more masterful one is

about his instrument, he is inevitably going to be presented with the spectrum of unknown

knowledge. The notion of “mastery” of an instrument in this regard I consider flawed. Having

knowledge in the arts does not necessarily imply an absence in its truth. More so as an area of

knowledge it allows in its use, as a tool to firm a foundation of one’s beliefs. Where through

sense perception and emotion, the arts are used to lead us to a deeper understanding of things

around us. Which in contrast leads me to the claim that knowledge gives us knowledge that

science cannot. Through the incorporation of ways of knowing, the arts allow for visualization to

conceive powerful images. As an area of knowing this is the most prominent in regards to the

title. Through art an individual can be led to a more powerful understanding of the way things

function. Images as such do show the person to a road of confidence in that they come to their

own conclusions. In this sense of confidence, through imagination as a way of knowing we can

note at the same time sets uncertainty upon our acquired knowledge. We can never be certain in

the truth that lies within knowledge in the arts. But we can easily be led to a confidence different

to most other areas of knowledge in regards to knowing.

The natural sciences intend to precede emotion in its purpose. This can bring into

question, does new knowledge lead to doubt and new forms of ‘unknown’ in the sciences? The

human sciences acquire knowledge by the universally known scientific method. The method is a

collection of steps used to gain new knowledge and correct previous knowledge. It is based on

empirical evidence that undergoes specific principles of reasoning that allow for a hypothesis

ultimately to be proven or disproven. The scientific method is meant to be void of bias,

 5

completely objective. This is evident through strict and regulated methodology. What the

scientific method is capable of is coming into correlation with other laws or theories to create

and define a certain experience in a framework of understanding. As a principle, this constitutes

the foundation of any and all well founded scientific theory or law.

As an example in the sciences I would like to mention the Theory of Everything. This

theory encompasses our understanding of all the fundamental physical forces in our universe. Of

which I could mention, gravity, electromagnetism, and nuclear force. As far as separate theories

are concerned, physicists have come up with one for each force. The purpose of the ToE would

serve as the amalgamation of the four. Effectively explaining all of the physical aspects of our

universe. A theory of this kind inherently implies that the nature of the universe can be subject to

testing. This can bring into question, does the pursuit of such knowledge lead to doubt in regards

to the premise of the theory?

On the other hand, we know that each forces have theories that have separately been

accounted for. Physicists further aim to encompass them into one large theory which would

account for all of the complexities that reside in our universe. One can argue that if science can

answer the underpinnings of the constituents of this theory, it can just as simply answer the

theory in its entirety.

We as people have greatly improved our ability on acquiring new knowledge. As we

keep increasing that knowledge, will we eventually learn everything there is to know in our

physical universe? Will we be witness to such shifts in paradigm? The question that seems to be

of most epistemic value is; Will we at a stage in time come to a point in which knowledge won’t

imply ignorance? In regards to the title, I can personally argue both sides of the argument to be

true. Where the process of acquiring knowledge can prove to be reliable to an extent. According
 6

to the area of knowledge, I can with implicitly state confidence in my knowing. I arrive to

confidence in knowledge through cultivating doubt in said area which leads me to the acquiring

of new knowledge. This inherently implies the invalidity of doubt in this situation. On the other

hand, I can state that doubt and uncertainty comes hand in hand with acquiring new knowledge.

Through acquiring knowledge through ways of knowing, we come to see that certainty in a claim

in knowledge is not possible without the presence of uncertainty. I can conclude in mentioning

the natural sciences as a way of knowing to round off the arguments made. Science does not

focus on what is known, they focus on what it is that they do not know. Generalizing this claim

further, I believe that people as knowledge seekers, focus what they do not know. Cultivating

this ignorance, being driven by mystery is what drives us to acquire new knowledge. In making

this statement, I agree with the title in conclusion, to an extent I trust that certainty in knowledge

does come with an increase in doubt.

Word Count: 1600

 7

Works Cited

Steven Weinberg. Dreams of a Final Theory: The Scientist's Search for the Ultimate Laws of

Nature. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-307-78786-6.

“The Theory of Everything.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service,

www.pbs.org/faithandreason/intro/purpotoe-frame.html.