ARTICLES
The Nature of Knowledge
By David Ricketts
What is the nature of knowledge? Can it be said that knowledge is
built on facts and that these facts are variously illusory, transitory
and subject to change at the whim of self-interest, economic or
political imperatives? Currently we are in the midst of the sixth great extinction of life on
Earth. Some points to reflect on:
As the great French writer Albert Camus wrote: “But again and
again there comes a time in history when the man who dares to
say that two and two makes four is punished with death.” • The area of the Great Barrier Reef has shrunk by 50% in the
past 30 years;
• The number of animals on Earth has halved since 1970;
• The oceans contain vast ‘dead zones’ where the oxygen levels
are so low that most marine organisms can’t survive.
The schoolteacher is well aware of this, and the question is not
one of knowing what punishment or reward attends the making of
this calculation; the real question is that of knowing whether two
and two really do make four.
• Rising global temperatures due to the Enhanced Greenhouse
Effect are driving a change in Earth’s climate – and all the
consequences that this entails. Many scientists fear we
have reached the ‘tipping point’ after which it will become
unstoppable.
Knowledge, we are being cautioned, is a social construct. The
wise person knows this as does the businessman, the politician
and the lawyer. The scientists, always at a disadvantage from
this point of view, must therefore be first and foremost people of
courage and conviction, theirs being the role of the bellwether
whose treatment signals the degree to which a society is open to
the task of self-examination. Galileo would attest to this, having
been threatened by the Church with the death penalty if he did
not recant his statement that the Earth revolves around the Sun.
Thus it is the scientist we must start listening to, the scientist of
courage and conviction who, like Galileo, knows that two and
two does indeed make four. How can we do this? One must
eschew the so-called journalists who interpret their role as
one of entertainment and the provision of opinions rather than
commitment to uncovering the truth. One must make efforts to
access and understand the science behind the evidence. In a
world awash with trivia and the misinformation disseminated by
special interest groups, one must always be sceptical of motives.
Sooner rather than later we must recognise that economic growth
based on the explo