There is a point at which we seek to learn a thing in life, and a point at which we feel we have arrived at the right answer. These points are separated in time and effort. It is important, essential even that we do not presume that our time and effort has yielded us a pure representation of the reality of a matter. when we go about seeking to understand a thing there are a few considerations that need to be taken into account. Why are you looking? How much information are you needing to satisfy the “why”?  where are you looking? How will the source of the information likely bias the information as presented? If the subject is subjective in nature, what are some opposing  or divergent ideas about the subject matter?

It should also be considered the precision and accuracy of a source, and how you yourself wish to represent the information. The difference between these two is generally as follows:

The classic example is darts clustered together on a target. Precision is the consistently of where something ends up in a data set. Accuracy is the orientation of the average of a set of points with respect to the “bull’s eye”. An accurate but imprecise dartboard will have darts all over the place. Meanwhile, a precise but inaccurate  set will hit the same area on the board, but will not hit the bull’s eye.

It is therefore important when we set out that we cannot expect our perspectives on any subject to reflect the nature of things without testing them. We read or write and see the results, do some more research, and record again, and eventually we begin to see a better picture of what the general state of a field is on a question, the popular interpretation of that field and the biases of historical opinion that have existed in the past. Now generally it is not necessary to delve into the academic levels to satiate idol curiosity or to find a good cake recipe. But it is important to recognize that the postures that we hold towards our fellow human beings are usually upheld by information that we learned in one context or from a specific set of people. This is the information that informs the narrative that informs our way of life. Finding how accurate and precise our perspective is to the “bulls eye” ought to be a priority for all of us.

This method of studying is the backbone of academic work everywhere and is in its own way very similar to the way that the scientific method works, only instead of experimentation, the means is information. The history of information has allowed for this kind of method to work well for the layman, as if there are a limited number of books or information on a subject then the sources that deviate from professional consensus become apparent fairly quickly, to the harm or benefit of the question at hand. As has been observed during the recent pandemic, the existence of information is not an innate benefit if it is bad information. The real trick is having a good method to parse what information is good and what is not without merely filtering out what you dislike.

For instance, scientific consensus on what causes illness in the early 1800s was that it was a “miasma” or bad air which was an evolution of the ideas of the four humors from Ancient Greece. Remedies were often to go to the country side to get away from the bad air of a city. Now considering the rising industrial toxicity, use of coal, and lack of sewers, removing oneself from the city may have been effective treatment for some ailments, but missed the root cause of the issue. The body of information available was fairly consistent, however it did not reflect the actual causes of disease. Similarly, the existence of information on the internet from people we trust may seem to reflect a certain set of assumptions about the nature of a thing, and there may be some correlations that seem to confirm what we think but we may still be misunderstanding some fundamental element of what is actually happening.

During an outbreak of cholera in 1840s and 50s a London physician, John Snow, was able to trace the origin of cholera to contaminated water. Noting the behavior of the disease was not consistent with the theory he was able to ascertain that sewage discharged above one of in the water plants in the city was the likely candidate for contagion. A new outbreak near a ground well pump that had also been contaminated helped solidify his theory. This discovery lent much support to a growing case for modern germ theory, but even so, many doctors and scientists did not take the theory seriously until much later. An example can be found in the death of US President James Garfield in 1881. He had been shot, but the wound he suffered was deemed by doctors and former President and General US Grant to not be one that should have been lethal. However due to the suspicion of germ theory by Garfield’s doctors, and poor sanitation practices, bacterial infection set in and after an eleven week ordeal finally killed Garfield.

Given this type of anecdote we may be more inclined to trust the individual who respectfully disagrees with the consensus and these cases do exist, but the opposite is also true. There are a plethora of historical examples of individuals selling “snake oil” and “cure-alls” that do not stand up to close examination.

So how do we seek the truth of a matter, whether in medicine, science, or history? What does it mean to know a thing and how much time and energy should we devote to discovering the exact truth? There have been many people since the beginning of recorded history that have attempted to answer this question. It is important to know the truth. But it takes time to search it out. Since time is a limited currency, how much of it do we invest in this quest, and how much do we use for surviving? For thriving? For good or ill? For doing? For living? If Good is what we seek in studying the nature of things how much time do we spend looking for answers before we go and live the things we learn? how do we account for the confirmation bias? What are our motivations for seeking out a thing is as important a question to ask as the original question? The list goes on.

A few thoughts though on the nature of the pursuit of better things. So far in my reading of philosophy, history, and religion it seems that there is one theme of interest that tends to arise everywhere in the minds of the wise. Intellectual Humility. This idea may take a few different forms with different implications. The ancient Hebrews in several of their holy scriptures, would repeatedly acknowledge the inability of man to understand the infinite holy God. Job is confused and not able to understand the will of God. The writer of Ecclesiastes systematically seeks to find something meaningful in life and is confounded in his search. They find only that things are not meaningful in themselves even the search has no value unless it means something from some ultimate source, beyond the abilities of the seeker. The impression one might be left with some of these texts is that one should “let go and let God” or some pithy equivalent. On the contrary elsewhere a proverb perhaps by the same author says “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings.” (Prov 25:2). Seeking out a matter is then one that should not be ignored but one that should be made with an understanding of the limits of a finite existence and capacity, where sometimes our answers fall short of true estimation of the truth of a matter.

In Classical Greece the origin story of one of the worlds most famous philosophical figures, Socrates, is wrapped up in this question as well. A friend of Socrates once consulted an oracle to see if there was anyone in the world as wise as he. The answer as related later was no, which confused the philosopher, for he knew that there were many things that he himself did not know, and in many sectors people who were more competent at skills he did not himself possess. After much thought he concluded that there where essentially three different levels of “knowing”:

1. Not knowing that one does not know the Truth

2. Knowing that one does not know the Truth

3. Knowing that one knows the Truth

When seeking answers he discovered that whenever someone thought that they Knew could often be shown to be quite ignorant with some careful questions. He concluded that the third form of knowledge was not attainable by mortals and that the highest form of knowledge is “Knowing that you do not Know”.

This principle is reflected in modern social sciences in the Dunning-Kruger Effect. This psychological phenomenon arises in the tension between a person’s confidence in a subject and their experience. A little experience will make them very confident in their competence on a subject or with a skill. As a subject learns more there is a steep decline in their confidence as they learn the breadth of knowledge that they actually lack. Finally after a long time the subject slowly reaches true competence of the subject, and their confidence returns. This plays out in our educational to vocational system. As a young adult finishes school they may be assured of their competence in their particular area of study. Joining the workforce though often resets their expectations of themselves, as they learn how much they do not know. Additionally, the skills that are required in the “real world” are often far removed from those that are taught in academia, many of my own college friends say that they vast bulk of the information they learned in college is not what they use out in the field. Soft skills, good habits and familiarity with sets of knowledge specific to their vocations are what their careers are built on. As experience in a specific field continues, given a continual pursuit of self improvement, an employee becomes an expert in their field, and are hopefully fairly compensated for this expertise.

This effect can occur in more subtle ways as well. After learning a little about a subject that is non-essential to an individuals life, that is often the end of the matter, unless one is passionate or sufficiently motivated to dig into the subject. A person may look at symptoms online to see if they should see a doctor for instance. They may be confident at that point that they are fine or about to die due to that cursory glance and they may or may not be right, but it is generally not advised by the medical community because the depth of knowledge is not present to accurately assess the question. However, if for instance, a loved one has a rare disease and you study the existing research on the subject you will have firstly, a good grasp on what is happening to them, and perhaps a chance to competently advise them on medical treatment options. However this will very rarely result in the kind of competence one would expect from a medical professional.

It should be noted that there will always be gaps in knowledge, both for the experts, and for the seeker. Doctors are the most qualified to diagnose and treat an illness, they may refer you to a specialist if they do not personally know. A specialist is more qualified still, but sometimes the nature of the body and what ails it are elusive even to the best of medical professionals. This lack of knowledge or capacity by those at the top of a field may encourage the less competent, but more confident, to promote “snake oil” solutions, without a thorough basis for their claims. The confidence in the colloquial understanding or “common sense” solutions will not always be baseless, but so long as true experts have the freedom and right ethical standing to communicate the best approximation of the truth, then they should be deferred to.

Once one has a “critical mass” of knowledge one begins to know the areas of weakness in one’s own knowledge on that subject, or “knowing that you do not know”, and you begin to acquire the necessary tools, people and resources to better seek out what in the subject that you know you are ignorant of.

So with all of this in mind the best principles in seeking are curiosity, because we wish to know, and humility, because we know that that we do not know. I too am on this journey and I am not perfect in my knowledge, but as we dive into this project together I hope there is room to grow and explore together.