The imperfection of knowledge As truth surfaces during arguments, so do most of the important ideas during discussions.

Therefore it is no surprise that when the question "But how DO you know it?" came up in the heated con ersation a!out the e"istence of souls, # was left speechless with my !rain working away, processing the fascinating enquiry. And suddenly it dawned on me that e erything # know has !een told to me !y someone else, can !e pro ed wrong !y noon or is already wrong. # immediately ended the discussion and started to quietly ponder the shocking re elation. #f # couldn$t rely on my own knowledge, did that imply that knowledge, the concept in itself, wasn$t perfect? Trust me when # say that at first it did indeed sound more than cra%y, !ut as # mulled it o er again and again, the sane side of the idea started to appear. &irstly, knowledge has a use'!y date. (hat # know now, might !e wrong !y tomorrow, and e en this speech after a year or two could contain some wrong facts. According to &rit% )achlup, an economist, who first e"plored knowledge as an economic resource, knowledge decays similarly to radioacti e atoms. #n other words, there comes a moment when half of the knowledge is pro ed wrong, for e"ample, the appro"imate half'life of psychology is fi e years. Do you remem!er the times when teachers confidently taught us a!out the nine planets or!iting the *un? +ow, of course, e eryone knows that ,luto is not counted as a planet, thus lea ing only - of them in the solar system, !ut !efore .//0 we also 1+2( that there were nine. Therefore, one might wonder, how strongly can we stand our ground during discussions, if the things we know could !e discredited !y scientists e en as we speak? )oreo er, one has to !e careful while deepening one$s knowledge as there are many pseudoscientists more than willing to impart their falsified facts to nai e philomaths. 3owe er, as many of you might point out, nearly e erything is threatened !y the cold fingers of time, thus dou!ting the faultlessness of knowledge only !ecause of its immunodeficiency against time is a !it premature. But the undenia!le fact is that not only eternalness is a sign of perfection, so is uniqueness. And in this instance knowledge falls short. 2 erything the humanity knows can !e di ided into two groups 4 su!5ecti e and o!5ecti e knowledge. O!5ecti e knowledge are the facts that are true despite one$s up!ringing, religious !ackground or personal preferences. &or e"ample, one plus one equals two in the 6atican as well as in the most remote parts of Africa. Therefore, it can !e used effecti ely in discussions and arguments, !ecause there is only one true answer. *u!5ecti e knowledge, howe er, is a lot more complicated. ,lato stated that su!5ecti e knowledge is $a true !elief$. #t is a child$s play to understand the pro!lem we face 4 there isn$t one "right" !elief, !ecause to each indi idual their own !elief is right and undisputa!le. As a result the humanity ends up with knowledge that is poles apart, for e"ample, when it comes to 7od or 7ods and their e"istence, and therefore, infinitely una!le to agree on any matter. And a ci ilisation, locked in an endless fight for unpro a!le rights and wrongs, is doomed for destruction. To conclude, # would like to point out, that although knowledge is in no way redundant and should !e acquired at any possi!le moment, one would !e !lindly stu!!orn to ignore the imperfections of it. +ot only does knowledge age ungracefully, it also often clashes with itself, sparking unneccessary conflicts. And it is confined in its e"pansion or quoting Al!ert 2instein8 "#magination is more important than knowledge. &or knowledge is limited, whereas imagination em!races the entire world, stimulating progress, gi ing !irth to e olution." *o, the ne"t time

you emerge into a discussion, loosen your grip around your knowledge and gra! imagination with your other hand, and may!e, 5ust may!e, a whole new world will open up.