Summary:
Essay discusses if knowledge in mathematics and other disciplines is dependent on culture to the same degree and in the same ways.
Knowledge, according to Collins English Dictionary, is defined as gawareness, consciousness, or familiarity gained by experience of learningh. Onefs experience is affected by onefs culture to significantly because culture draws the line between moral and immoral, and acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Culture also defines how a particular action should be interpreted. However, math and science are highly objective areas of knowledge where onefs experience does not play any or at least no significant role in defining knowledge, and therefore is independent of culture. Humanities and social sciences however, have direct influences from culture and thus are very open to interpretation. Because of this, mathematics and sciences are the only clear gimpossible to denyh areas of knowledge.
In the field of mathematics, the distinction between evalidf and efallaciousf is indisputably clear in most cases. Mathematics relies upon rules and formulas formulated after countless hours of proving that it works every single time. The concepts of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division are understood all over the world because of their simple and practical use. Therefore, math is the most obvious and comprehensible area of knowledge due to its concrete laws and solid rules. Math will be universally accepted because of equations that correspond correctly with the number system. For example, the proof for Euclid's Second Theorem, which states that the number of primes is infinite, the postulate is that there are integers which are prime that is, they can only divide themselves and 1.@So assume you have a finite number of primes... p1, p2, p3.... pk@now, you take the product of all the known primes up to pk and call it n.@From there, exam n+1; n+1 can only have two states of existence... as a prime, or not a prime. If n+1 is a prime, then that means it's a different prime than p1, p2, p3.... pk@if n+1 is NOT prime, then that means it's a composite that CANNOT have ANY of the primes from the set {p1, p2, p3.... pk} as a product because n and n+1 are mutually prime, that is, n and n+1 cannot share a common factor.@Hence, the number of primes is infinite and this is completely independent of any bias with no culture involved. The proof is very clear; no matter how you look at it, you cannot refute the proof. As well, any proven theorem cannot be refuted.
Sciences, both applied and pure, require and deliver precise mathematically expressed knowledge. Therefore culture doesnft play important row in this field. Scientists make hypothesis, and after hypothesis is established and the experiment is carried out. The experiments are usually repeatable and only when they yield the same results repeated and successfully replicate what happens in mature are they regarded as truth, or knowledge universally. The distinction between evalidf and efallaciousf is indisputably clear, in most cases just like in the field of mathematics.
In the field of humanities, on the other hand culture is and integral part of the knowledge. Deferent languages, different cultural background affect knowledge a lot. In literature studies, a branch of humanities, the interpretation of a passage is completely subjective. Though there is a systematic element to literature interpretation, such as the study of various literature devices and structure of poetry, in most part, interpretations are made based at least partly on onefs own personal experiences and cultural background. There is open to much debate and discussions, most of the times. Anyone is free to make analysis and give their own meanings to any literary work as they wish.
According to Webster's English dictionary,@Social science is defined as gthe study of human social organization and relationships using scientific methodsh Therefore, it is still dependent on culture, but to lesser extent than humanities. For example in economics, if we think about the economy in Canada, it is really easy to start up our own business and survive because the government or society allows it with a lot of good benefits like tax benefits so there is lots of support for social science, but in other countries they do not care like in south American countries there is little support for that. But the problem of knowledge is in history, almost every culture or society is based on history and is built up on tradition so thus culture does not affect social science.
Even in math and sciences, though, have the influences of culture. For example, there are new methods of proving, which is culture based.@for example, using computers to prove things.@Some mathematicians don't think that theorems "proved" by computers are proved at all.@An example would be the Four Color Theorem. some things ultimately cannot be proved by hand@an example would be the Four Color Theorem. The Four Color Conjecture states that for any map, you only need 4 colors to color in all the countries without any two adjacent country sharing the same color@this applies not only to maps, but also to all coloring schemes@and for 200 years nobody was able to prove it@by hand anyway. If math is ultimately unarguable@then how is it possible that the method proving is arguable? This appears to be a contradiction@and if one method of proving is questionable, then is all methods of proving ultimately questionable? is it acceptable to have a computer do a prove by literally trying "all" the possibilities"@remember that for any conjecture, if there is even ONE case where it's untrue, the conjecture is considered false@but there is an infinite number of cases, or so the argument goes@so nothing can really try "everything@because if your culture is say, more conservative, you would not tolerate the use of computers in what you would consider "pure mathematics"@if a culture is more pragmatic, it would endorse "new" ideas such as using the computer to prove things. In math, specifically in calculus itfs often called the universal language, because calculus uses the same principles and notation in different countries. But different cultures focus on different aspects of knowledge. Some cultures teach a lot on math but little on arts .so math knowledge becomes developed a lot more so it depends on culture that way.
In conclusion, mathematics is the only field of Knowledge which cannot be influenced by culture, or where culture does not play an important role in, simply because of the universal basis that mathematics is derived from. Since mathematics is completely black and white, and any rejected answers are only there because of the nature of the problem, mathematics will remain ultimately as the most universal subject which is completely objective with no grey area. Theorems will forever be discovered as time goes by, and they will be pressed against other laws of mathematics to ensure their validity. In humanities, though, such methodical analysis cannot be performed and thus there is gray area and the limit is ambiguous. It relies on the credibility provided by the experts of the field, onefs mind and cultural background. Therefore, in the end, it is possible to say that the knowledge in mathematics and other areas of knowledge is not dependent on culture to the same degree and in the same way.
This is the complete article, containing 1,178 words
(approx. 4 pages at 300 words per page).
