Alyssa Mae C.

Ausa Reaction Paper 1 February 8, 2019

STS 1 – D2 Mr. John Raymond B. Jison

CHANGE AND CONSTANT SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH

Science, based on my own terms, refers to the process of knowing all things in our environment in
the form of observation, investigation, and experimentation while technology, on the other hand, is the
application and usage of these processes and methods in our everyday life to give a solution to a problem.

Most people may say that technology is dependent on science, and without science, there would be
no technology. However, the way I see it, science may also be dependent on technology. Without
technology, there would be no science. We would not be able to study our environment and the things
around us. We would not be able to explain how something happen without the use of technology. For
example, when we study the microscopic world, we need technology. We would not be able to see those
tiny creatures called bacteria because they are invisible or cannot be seen by the naked eye. We need the
aid of a microscope. Human beings, before the inventions of a microscope, were incapable to see bacteria.
Nowadays, with modern technology, we can see and study those tiny, microscopic organisms.

Nevertheless, I do not totally disagree on the idea that technology is dependent on science.
Furthermore, without science there would be no technology. As I have said, science is the process of
knowing things. It is the knowledge of something. Without knowing, technology would be useless. If we
do not have the knowledge regarding technology, we would not be able to use it. Let me use my example
regarding microscope and bacteria. For example, you are given a microscope and it is the first time you
have seen it. You do not know what to do with it or how to use it. Its purpose to help see the microscopic
organisms is useless because of your limited knowledge regarding the technology. Another example is the
use of gadgets such as smart phones and tablets by the elderly. They lived in the generation were gadgets
were not yet invented or were not popular. They have little knowledge on gadgets that is why they rarely
use them.

Therefore, science and technology are interdependent with each other. One cannot live without the
other. One is useless without the other. They need each other in order to understand the world and our
environment better. Science needs technology in order to study our society and environment in an easier
and better way while technology needs science in order to know a lot more and to further improve our
understanding on our society and our environment. Problems which are complicated and difficult will be
easier to answer when science and technology is used together.

People think that only the scientists and technologists are the ones who contribute and help in the
study and discovery of new things around us. However, that is not the case. Mechanics, teachers, store
owners, and even students like us can help by observing, recording what we observed, and experimenting
with the use of tools and equipments. There are still a lot of undiscovered secrets of the universe and as
humans, we are always curious and hungry for new information and discoveries. Asking and questioning
everything around us is proof of how we are eager to know everything and to understand everything.
Nevertheless, there are always limits and restrictions in everything even knowledge. We cannot know
everything. Our mind does not have enough storage for every information that the universe have. All the
same, these restrictions are what makes life more exciting. It makes knowing more thrilling and fun.

When we were younger, we were taught by our parents the difference between what is right and
what is wrong. As we grow older, we develop our own sense of right and wrong because of different factors
in our environment such as the people we meet, the challenges we face, the problems we encounter, and
many other factors. Because of this, we all have different perception and views on different things. For
Alyssa Mae C. Ausa Reaction Paper 1 February 8, 2019
STS 1 – D2 Mr. John Raymond B. Jison

example, the word, “cell” can be given a lot of meanings and definitions by different people depending on
their background. A scientist or biologist can describe or define a “cell” as the basic unit of life. However,
a policeman may give a different description or meaning to the word “cell”. The “cell” that policemen know
may be a “prison cell” where criminals or bad guys get locked up. The knowledge we have on different
things is dependent on how we were raised and how we were developed by our society and environment.
But is our knowledge – what we know – a fact? Or is it just an opinion or belief?

I believe that a fact can be changed overtime. Just like us, a fact may change depending on what
we know and how much we know. Let’s take the example from Professor David Moshman’s Epistemic
Development and perils of Pluto. It was a fact that Pluto was categorized as a planet before the year 2006.
However, the fact changed because the definition of the word “planet” changed. The scientists’ knowledge
on planets were altered resulting in the banishment of Pluto as a planet and leaving eight planets. Hence,
what we may know now as a fact may change as time passes by.

In the past, many people accepted the theory about spontaneous generation where living organisms
arise from non-living matter. For those people back then, that was a fact. But, the “fact” that they knew was
challenged and was changed. Many scientists proved that the theory of spontaneous generations is not true,
therefore is not a fact. They experimented and showed evidence that life may not come from non-living
things but living organisms may only arise from a living organism. Another example is during the time of
Aristotle and Ptolemy where they proposed that the Earth is the center of our solar system and not the sun.
They called this as the geocentric model or the Ptolemaic mode. Many people believed this was true and
therefore, believed it was a fact. Until a Polish astronomer, Nicolaus Copernicus, proved otherwise. He
stated that the Earth was not the center of the solar system. He proved that the sun was the center of the
solar system and that all the other planets revolve around it. They called this as the heliocentric model or
Copernican model.

Nonetheless, the question is why descriptions, meanings, and definitions change? Why do facts
change? It is because of Epistemic Cognitive and Epistemic Development. According to Moshman (2007),
“(1) Epistemic cognition is knowledge about knowledge. (2) Epistemic development is progress in
epistemic cognition. Epistemic development, then, is progress in knowledge about knowledge.” Moshman
stated that a child may have epistemic cognitions at an early age of 4 years old. This is the time where
children may understand that some beliefs may not be true. As they grow up and mature, they distinguish
at least three epistemic domains such as domain of truth, domain of taste, and domain of reasonable
interpretation. Domain of truth is where objectivity succeeds, and the truth and falsity can easily be
distinguished or recognized. Domain of taste is where subjective prevails where the there is no importance
in knowing the truth and the falsity because of bias and preferences of each side. Domain of interpretations
is somewhat reasonable because it gives fair verdict where ideas may be justified but the truth cannot be
proven.

Epistemic Development is a progress in knowledge about knowledge. According to Moshman

(2007), “Epistemic development in adolescence and adulthood, I have suggested, is largely a matter of
determining which of these three domains the domain of knowledge is. Such development is neither
universal nor tied to age, but it tends to proceed in the familiar sequence extending from objectivist to
subjectivist to rationalist epistemologies.” As we develop and mature, we tend to know and differentiate
right from wrong, good from bad, etc. This is the time where we can distinguish by ourselves which is
really the truth based on all our knowledge from the past. We can discern where of the three domains, the
Alyssa Mae C. Ausa Reaction Paper 1 February 8, 2019
STS 1 – D2 Mr. John Raymond B. Jison

fact or the truth lie. It does not mean that you are not epistemically developed if you are already an adult
and still lack epistemic knowledge. Epistemic Development just says that our knowledge about knowledge
is developing and progressing every day, as time passes by..

It is true that we should not stop discovering and learning new information. Knowing, is the reason
why we are living. Our curiosity for the truth and constant search for change makes us feel alive. However,
we should be more cautious and wary on the discoveries we are going to make since discovery is also a
construct, and it is not only based on observation and experimentation alone but also on how much
knowledge one has regarding that new information, and we really do not know which one we know is the
truth and whether it is a fact.

REFERENCES

Moshman, D. (2007). Epistemic Development and the Perils of Pluto.