http://search.deviantart.com/?q=by:ithildin&section=today deviantART RSS for by:ithildin en-us Copyright 2009, deviantART.com Tue, 22 Dec 2009 23:02:19 PST deviantART.com http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss http://s.deviantart.com/minish/widgets/apple-touch-icon-precomposed.png http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/23293734/ http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/23293734/ Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:39:33 PST When thinking about knowledge, as aforementioned I believe that we gravitate towards and value information that we “Know”. This we have concrete justifications for. When looking at the purest form of perception these consist of “this is a desk” and “this is a pencil”. We know these things based on the multifaceted sensory perceptions we have. We know these things based on name recognition, based on visual cues, on the way they smell and feel, whether it reminds us of a past experience or something you have a personal affinity towards; the fact remains that we can identify these “truths” by logical deduction. And in cases revolving around identification, the justification is in our past experiences with these items. Although I have stated these are held in higher value, I have not said that it is always correct. We know of events that can act as contradictions to this claim. For example it was widely thought and highly valued that the Earth was the center of the universe from as early as 150 AD. This theory was called the Ptolemy (Kuhn 66). This not only had mathematical justification that fit the movement of the planets and the suns movements to acceptably accurate amounts, but also had justification grounded in the bible, stating that the earth is “firmly established” and cannot be “moved”. Because of the justification it held with hard science and with the Church, which was the most powerful body at the time, the value of the knowledge was indisputably high. Because of this the new model was not accepted until later. Although the Knowledge was held with more value than this new ideal/concept it was deemed wrong. This is important because even though something may be justified it does not mean it is correct, which is an interesting thing to note when looking at the validity of this method of thinking.
Science works in a similar pattern to perception in its regards to justification. The scientific method is a prime example of value being based on the amount of justification found to back it’s claims. When information is tested using the scientific method, it is done so in multiple trials and in many different situations. In each trial the information is pressured by different stimuli. It is after these measures that the information gathered is compared against a hypothesis and results are recorded. These results are considered to hold more value than the hypothesis. This is because instead of an educated guess the information in the results was justified by experimentation. Now because of this value the information can become commonly used knowledge. But I do believe there is a reason for this, a reason we agree to an extent on many things. This is because for the human race to survive we need this foundation for thought. Therefore I think of this valued knowledge as the foundation, the backbone or starting point, of logical thought. Therefore to an extent I believe that logical thought stems from the way we value certain knowledge more than others. I believe it is because at a young age we are given this knowledge that is highly justified, and in turn this basis allows us to logically perceive the world from the foundation we were given.
Now when looking at Religion, we can find some incongruence when comparing it with our value based on justification belief. Religion is a multicultural and almost all major religions are based off a text: The Bible, Koran, Torah ect. In many cases these texts are used as justification for their knowledge of religion, which at face value seems to fit the mold of value based on justification. However if we go one step farther, and look at what is justifying the texts, we could make the claim that there is almost always no first hand account for anything that has been written down. It is a compilation, in most cases, of ideals written down over thousands of years. Because of this most of the justification here has to be deemed null and void. So why is religion and the knowledge based around it deemed so valuable? I think this is where Faith comes in. Faith, I believe, is the exact opposite of justification. The fact that so many people can believe something based on Faith alone brings an interesting argument to he table. However, I would still venture to say that although faith based knowledge is held at a high value, in more cases then none the knowledge with justification is held higher. But I am not with out b... ]]> ~ithildin http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/23231069/ http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/23231069/ Mon, 16 Feb 2009 08:47:19 PST When thinking about knowledge, as aforementioned I believe that we gravitate towards and value information that we “Know”. This we have concrete justifications for. When looking at the purest form of perception these consist of “this is a desk” and “this is a pencil”. We know these things based on the multifaceted sensory perceptions we have. We know these things based on name recognition, based on visual cues, on the way they smell and feel, whether it reminds us of a past experience or something you have a personal affinity towards; the fact remains that we can identify these “truths” by logical deduction. And in cases revolving around identification, the justification is in our past experiences with these items. Although I have stated these are held in higher value, I have not said that it is always correct. We know of events that can act as contradictions to this claim. For example when _____________
Science works in a similar pattern to perception in its regards to justification. The scientific method is a prime example of knowledge’s value being based on the amount of justification found to back it’s claims. When information is tested using the scientific method, it is done so in multiple trials and in many different situations. In each trial the information is pressured by different stimuli. It is after these measures that the information gathered is compared against a hypothesis and results are recorded. These results are considered to hold more value than the hypothesis. This is because instead of an educated guess the information in the results was justified by experimentation. Now because of this value the information can become commonly used knowledge. But I do believe there is a reason for this, a reason we agree to an extent on many things. This is because for the human race to survive we need this foundation for thought. Therefore I think of this valued knowledge as the foundation, the backbone or starting point, of logical thought. Therefore to an extent I believe that logical thought stems from the way we value certain knowledge more than others. I believe it is because at a young age we are given this knowledge that is highly justified, and in turn this basis allows us to logically perceive the world from the foundation we were given.
Now when looking at Religion, we can find some incongruence when comparing it with our value based on justification belief. Religion is a multicultural and almost all major religions are based off a text: The Bible, Koran, Torah ect. In many cases these texts are used as justification for their knowledge of religion, which at face value seems to fit the mold of value based on justification. However if we go one step farther, and look at what is justifying the texts, we could make the claim that there is almost always no first hand account for anything that has been written down. It is a compilation, in most cases, of ideals written down over thousands of years. Because of this most of the justification here has to be deemed null and void. So why is religion and the knowledge based around it deemed so valuable? I believe this is where Faith comes in. Faith, I believe, is the exact opposite of justification. The fact that so many people can believe something based on Faith alone brings an interesting argument to he table. However, I would still venture to say that although faith based knowledge is held at a high value, in more cases then none the knowledge with justification is held higher.

]]> ~ithildin http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/14768074/ http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/14768074/ Mon, 24 Sep 2007 06:07:32 PDT 1st period Drafting One
9/24/07

The Stony Creek Bridge

The bridge we chose to build is named the Stony Creek Bridge. It is located in British Columbia and has served the railroad companied since the year of 1893. The bridge was built by a contracting company, the Hamilton Bridge Company, and later was strengthened by the Canadian Bridge Company. This additional strengthening was made in 1929 by the addition of exterior arches, and on this subject let’s begins to look at the structure of our bridge.
The Bridge at hand is classified as an arch/span bridge. It spans a mountain crevice of 102.48m long and 90 m deep. There is one large arch that spans this gap with support beams that brace the platform that hold the railroad tracks. The way an arch bridge works is fairly ingenious, it takes the weight of the load traveling on top and distributes the weight, or force, outward through the arch to where the base of the bridge is anchored. This is then countered in turn by the base support, or abundements, which keeps the arch from flexing, buckling, or spreading apart.

]]> ~ithildin http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/14056195/ http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/14056195/ Tue, 07 Aug 2007 08:24:51 PDT
]]> ~ithildin http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/9714151/ http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/9714151/ Sun, 13 Aug 2006 14:18:20 PDT ~ithildin http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/9296753/ http://ithildin.deviantart.com/journal/9296753/ Thu, 06 Jul 2006 21:10:37 PDT THANK YOU SO MUCH ]]> ~ithildin