Knowledge and bias

Today in hi score and scientific discipline there is a lot of different persuade that eject be seen through with(predicate) everyday life. The question that I am trying to answer is if we can bring forth knowledge despite bias and endurance in chronicle and science. on that point atomic number 18 three mall types of bias that we can see In nowadayss world, firstly there Is cultural bias which has to do with blabs relating to culture, religion and personal practices and wherefore there Is confirmation bias which is when someone is trying to prove a point and ignores all evidence which old contradict him.Both these types of bias can be found in history, however also in science there is the second type of bias when a scientist has an hypothesis and does experiments, selecting data which proves his idea. Despite what battalion say about endurance, it is proven that selection helps us cut down all the knowledge that we obtained, otherwise there would be too much to decompose and Interpret at the same time. If all the huge amounts of knowledge were to be used there would be too much and it would defer us from the truth. ashesBoth history and science since the beginning of time have contributed to help us a lot to develop both socially, frugalally and politically. History has taught us about the past and what must not be repeated in the future. Science on the other hand has managed to explain the way the world full treatment and turn up us new technologies that have helped us for many years. However in both Science and history there will still everlastingly be someone that will contradict another persons point of view. It is for these many reasons that bias and selection are constantly present in our world today.In story there Is bias through deferent interpretations of documents and sources and In Science there Is selection when a scientist follows one specific method and doesnt History today, as I said before, is often based on cultural bias which can mostly be seen through political, religious and moral views that may contradict all(prenominal) other. When Historians write new interpretations on history they do not all have the same cultural background or the same sources, so in general they all have different points of views that will obviously not be agreed on.In science we may question some experiments as we do not know if the scientist used the scoop out possible method nor do we know if he used the best materials and variables to conduct his experiment and find the best possible result in the end. History is the study of evidence we have of the past and it is based on human affairs. However history has always been passed on from generation to generation by documents and recording.But when we think about this idea we may feel that the randomness that is passed from generation to generation cannot be totally reliable as we do not know for certain if the truth is ally stated in the documents or if the person who wrote the account Just wanted to censor the entropy to hide personal facts about certain events. History without bias and selection is hard to find as sources are already based on a certain point of view and we can only observe what that particular person believes.It is for this reason that so many books have been written in history as if there was no bias or selection we could Just write one big book with the same point of view. The bias in history can be double because we have the point of view of the witness and then the as of the historian. The worst about this idea is that it can genuinely distort the facts so that we dont know what to believe. When referring to selection in history, it all depends on the historians analyzing different sources, he may have national or cultural bias that influenced his understanding.Some historians might believe one point of view whereas another one may believe the opposite. Selection is history is inevitable and a lot depends on what the historian has learnt in his life before he chooses the best possible sources. As for example if a historian learnt since the ginning of his life that communism was the best economic system, he will base his knowledge on what he has known for his whole life and be very critical of capitalism. How can we trust sources that we are not sure they are giving us real facts?In history there have always been hidden documents and hidden agendas in collection to keep a country under control. On the other hand there is an argument that states that knowledge in history can be obtain despite bias and selection because history is about people and so if we know about their point of view, we know more about why travel happened and hoe people felt at that time. This is important but we have to be careful and try our best to find sources that show both sides of the information researched, it also important to know the cultural bias of a historian before we believe totally what he says.If we look at science to day it has helped us a lot in the world as it has developed technology which has made our lives a lot easier. When referring to selection in science we get that each time a new experiment is conducted the results may change a little. It is for that reason that scientist use specific methods, variables and materials in order to get almost the same results each time. It is in this idea that we see selection as scientists are forced to choose specific methods, variables and materials.But how can the scientist know that the methods he is utilize are the most efficient ones? In science topic bias can be seen as money from research. For example in Science the holes in the ozone layer have been a trend for many years in which scientists have told the people of the world to use more renewable energy. But how can we be sure that using renewable energy will really help us? Science is constantly changing due to new technologies that enlighten experiments less selective and give a less bias ed point of view.It is in this idea that we can say that technology is the key to developing science and being more sure of the knowledge we get from it. For example a scientist from European background may have different interpretations of results in comparison with the scientist from Saudi Arabia due to their religious beliefs and cultural background. Conclusion In conclusion I believe that science and history are both very important in human development and I believe that even with bias and selection we are able to attain knowledge..I believe that in history bias and selection cannot be ignored, and that they are a very important part of understanding the human and emotional side of what happened. However in science bias and selection will decrease when more technologies are developed in order to decrease this bias and selection, which will let scientists, conduct their experiments, and repeat them systematically to show they are free of bias.