Discuss this statement in relation to two areas of knowledge.
Two areas of knowledge discussed in this essay relate to religion and ethics. However, a sound definition of concepts must be advanced before profound discussions on the subjects religion and ethics are embraced. Religion was considered the opium of the people by the Philosopher Karl Marx (1818 – 1883). Marx perceived the facts embodied in religion as well as rituals and beliefs to be nothing more than systems used to subjugate people. Precisely, it was exploitation of man by man, the powerful exploiting the powerless; rich by poor; owners of the means of production by those who work for them (Bulbulia. 2005).
Emilie Durkheim contended that religion is a system of beliefs pertaining to things sacred. In reality these are the knowledge facts religion brings to society. Social groups practice beliefs, which are translated as facts. Sociologically religion is known as an institution in itself just as knowledge and facts. For example, in my experience with religion, it gives me some self-worth that despite what people may say or do to me there are elements or forces beside the ‘me’ that is seen, which supports and loves me (Bulbulia. 2005).
Similarly, ethics as an area of knowledge relates to me what my moral conscience perceives as right and wrong; even though advanced philosophers argue that, in reality there is no right and wrong when perceived from a knowledge basis. People design ethical conduct and religious attitudes bases on their perception of the world. Various disciplines practiced in the world today demand that professionals operate according to ethical standards. The nursing profession, lawyers, doctors, scientist, researchers, writers all must confirm to some code of ethics in their practice. The facts supporting these conducts are vague, but confirmation is demanded or censorship may follow. Insidiously, this knowledge is nothing more than the systematic organization of facts (Perle, 2014).
These facts concerning religion and ethics clearly now leave me to interpret knowledge assumptions as systems of belief also in agreement with Emile Durkheim. Both ethics and religion emerge from systems of belief with no profound truth, neither justification. How can we argue then for truth, facts and knowledge in proposing that knowledge is nothing more than the systematic organization of facts? Let us now examine the definitions (Perle, 2014).
More importantly, philosophical assumptions related to the theory of knowledge aspire towards an understanding of and differentiating among belief, truth and justification. Over time, since Immanuel Khant’s propositions regarding enlightenment, philosophers have been struggling to define and conceptualize the term in relation to knowledge acquisition, revision and validation. Knowledge acquisition remerges from belief in facts. With reference again to religion and ethics knowledge acquisition related to facts contained in the culture, discipline and practice provide an understanding of how to be religious or ethical (Miller, 2009). .
When I attend church/mosque/temple, pray read the holy/sacred scriptures I am practicing religion based on facts presented to me and my belief from acquisition of knowledge. Therefore, in perceiving that ‘knowledge is nothing more than the systematic organization of facts’ it would become necessary to define knowledge and facts, differentiating between the two (Miller, 2009).
Facts, truth and knowledge are interrelated from the premise of conceptualization and interpretation. Philosophers further expound the facts notion to describe compound facts; fact value distinction model, which reveals that one fact can actually lead to interpretations of a number of other facts. For example, my belief in God is a fact of religion. Another fact emerging from it if I am good this God will bless me. If I practice moral ethics as a fact of my being, then I will develop a moral consciousness, which ought to be fair to all human beings. These are important areas in both knowledge and ethics which this discussion embraces.
In the preceding pages of this document when defining and conceptualizing knowledge it was discovered that, three criteria must be established for words or statements to be considered knowledge. Truth must be established; believed and justified. Facts are considered truth once the correspondence experience can be verified. In my opinion the same is true of knowledge even though Bernard Russel contends that the theory of knowledge is actually a product of doubt implying that knowledge itself is saturated with doubt when attempts are made at justifying corresponding experiences with facts; defining truth and validating beliefs (Braidotti, 2006).
When discussing the two areas of knowledge as it relates to religion and ethics it could be found that in religion for example, knowledge is not acquired merely through education, learning facts, creating truth, justification and believing in it, but rather some divine intervention of knowing. Here religion embraces emotion as a significant aspect of knowledge acquisition, revision production, shaping, classification and acceptance, which is the distinguishing factor between science and philosophy. The obvious knowledge issue question facing philosophers is can facts, which produce religious knowledge exists without a context (Braidotti, 2006).
Significantly, religious knowledge is classified into four dimensions namely content; frequency; intensity and centrality. Content pertains to facts; frequency; intensity and centrality are associated with determining truth, establishing beliefs and justication for them. The knowledge issue here is where is the corresponding evidence that God/ sprit/divine exists somewhere in a human soul, which is invisible. Facts and knowledge then become intangible/abstract concepts beyond the conventional philosophical paradigms (Küçükcan, 2010).
However, elements of religious knowledge, which are still relevant to this discussion regarding knowledge is nothing more than the systematic organization of facts lay in the existence of truth. All religions claim to have truth, which is an important feature of knowledge. In the same way there are strong belief systems in religions institutions justified by doctrine/ content, which again are facts written in a holy book that guide actions. These facts form the knowledge basis of religious practice (Küçükcan, 2010).
When ethical knowledge applications are made to this discussion the element of emotion as it relates to a moral conscience influence in organizing facts; forming beliefs and justifying them is taken into consideration. Ethics is classified as moral philosophy. The knowledge issue question here asks what facts exist that justifies the truth in this area of knowledge. While religion seeks to establish knowing beyond actual facts ethics is preoccupied with facts that determine right and wrong actions by defending; systematizing and recommending concepts (Miller, 2009).
Philosophers attempt to clarify the boundaries of moral philosophy in advancing that it is not keeping in alignment with religion, social or even legal systems, but aligning one’s self to truth. Essentially, knowledge is truth, facts are truth. Therefore, in summarizing this argument concerning knowledge is nothing more than the systematic organization of facts referencing two areas of knowledge religion and ethics (moral philosophy); I must conclude that in my hear since the theory of knowledge is a product of doubt knowledge is nothing more than the systematic organization of facts which are likely to produce corresponding experiences (Miller, 2009)
Works cited
Braidotti, Rosi. Posthuman, All Too Human: Towards a New Process Ontology. Theory Culture
23. 2006; 197–208. Print
Bulbulia. J. Are There Any Religions? An Evolutionary Explanation." Method & Theory in the
Study of Religion 17.2, 2005 Print.
Miller.The Conditions of Moral Realism.The Journal of Philosophical Research,34, 2009; 123-
155. Print
Küçükcan, T. Multidimensional Approach to Religion: a way of looking at religious
phenomena. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies, 4(10), 2010; 60–
70.Print
Perle, S. Morality and Ethics: An Introduction. http://www.dynamicchiropractic.com/mpacms/dc/article.php?id=46121 Acessed on February, 19th, 2014. Web.
