uhhh...no

Today we know what we know because it is proven. We know the earth is round and about subatomic particles because scientist have confirmed their existence. Even though any one individual cannot explain these “known facts” that individual can go to another individual who does know the answer and can explain/justify it  Today we are taught to question theories and ideas that have not been proved. Has a whole, humans today are naturally skeptical, we analyze things because we are taught that by blindly following people or believing ideas without proof we might be believing something that is not true. 

Saying all this, humans only know what comes before us. We know science thanks to the scientists that have existed before us. In other words, everything we think or know comes from a pre-existing idea-- nothing is original. Even new discoveries have been inspired by what comes before them. Basing our ideas and justification of what is true by what has come before us makes us the same a Columbus.

As Lucas said in class, “Columbus was a product of the society in which he lived.” Like we do today, Columbus only knew what came before him. He knew mermaids exists because those who came before assured him so-- they saw mermaid! In 1492 people did not have the skepticism that people have today. There were not scientists nor the scientific technology like we have today, knowledge was gained through experience.

Basically, I am saying that our way of knowing is not better than Columbus’ because our two ways are fundamentally the same. Society today and in 1492 told people how they know things. In 1492 through pre-existing experts, and today, through scientists, researchers, or experts in the field. In both cases people “knew what they knew” in the way society told them was the proper way to know something.