The Truth of Measuring Knowledge

Previously I had written a reflection of society’s measure of knowledge or rather society’s contemporary definition of an intellect or educated person. I had questioned society’s views on concentrated knowledge versus well rounded knowledge. Though I was unable to provide an answer, concluding, only, that personally, I looked to achieve the well rounded scholar. A closer reflection though, I must admit that, it is also largely due to my pride in possessing a mountain of trivia in memory; however, the new question arises: is it necessary that one person attempt to remember all this information by the usage of memory alone?

Many people call the 21^st century the Age of Information. Today, with the aid of computers and technological processors, is it still needed for a human to be learned in his own right? Or would it be not only more efficient use of time and ability to rely on these computers to help us remember facts so that we may discover new methods of “improving society.” I put that phrase in quotes not that I disagree, but that I think it remains debatable whether or not our technological advancements, medical advancements and such are really making the overall standard of living. That remains for time and each individual’s measure of happiness to decide.

Today, we, humans, spend a lot of time and focus our attentions on what we call artificial intelligence. Robots are referred to those that are pure machines with some semblance of being able to “make” their own decisions. But from a more abstract point of view, maybe we are already able robots, not in our mechanical features or CPU, but rather in our ability to use these tools as a means to further our goals. This is an accomplishment, certain scholars, have raised as the most applauded and unique feature of being human. We are cyborgs in our ability to use technology in such a way that it is an extension of ourselves.

Taking advantage of this unique ability then, perhaps it is not needed for a person to possess in their own personal store of knowledge everything that they need to know. Maybe the person who can most perfectly and most efficiently utilize these new technologies is the real winner. Where one person can rely on his own memory to retain a fact with more effort, another person could possibly retrieve the same information with more speed and accuracy with the help of new technologies.

In the Information Age, society is flooded with information. This makes the question not as simple as one person of specified knowledge versus another of encyclopedic knowledge. There is now the third man that we cannot forget. This man, with a simple laptop has in fact more information and “knowledge” at his fingertips compiled by an entire society as opposed to any single person. Perhaps the last question that remains to be asked is: can we still call it knowledge if this piece of information is not in possession inside one person’s memory, through the effort of learning and understanding? What indeed then is the measure of knowledge? Is it quantity of facts or quality of facts? Is simply “knowing” the facts enough? The measure of knowledge is neither. It lies in one person’s ability to interpret and make a conclusion from this compilation of facts. This is the true measure of knowledge.

Reflections on Society’s Measure of Knowledge

Deciding to have afternoon tea with an elder adult family member who claims to be more invested in your future than you are, is more often than not, a regrettable decision. You get to sit for a minimum of one to two hours, if luck is on your side, lamenting internally over your bottom, and listen the said adult tell you all about the different methods of achieving wealth or fame or maybe both that they have gathered through their grapevine of reliable sources. If this family member, also just so happens to be childless and has all but adopted you as their pseudo child while possessing an innate love for gossiping with a wealth of friends who have children your age, well, woe is you. Or I, in this case.

On the other hand; however unfortunate my afternoon was, it was also thought inspired surprisingly. Discussing my amicable affair with cold dim sum somehow led to a debate over whether it is more applaud worthy to possess a vast range of knowledge encompassing a variety of subjects from British literature to financial accounting or to possess in depth knowledge of only one or a few subjects.

The main example provided was the high school history projects of the daughter of a family friend. This brilliant student had succeeded to present George Washington as her person of research since elementary school. Each time a new teacher would ask her to make a research report on a person of significance in history Washington would be risen from the dead to make an appearance in her paper. This ensued all throughout middle school to high school. Each time, the report would be improved upon, added on to, and modified into a product of expected quality. How none of her teachers ever noticed it was the same report is not the question. The question is whether or not these actions should be applauded. On the one hand, she has gained incredible knowledge going far beyond that of a normal person on the topic of George Washington. On the other hand, there is little she could tell you about anyone else. Should the preferred result be knowing all the significant players in American history or knowing one especially well?

Applying this question on a much larger scale, is the 21^st Century promoting the person with one specialty, or the multitalented person? This question intrudes upon the competitive arenas of every field and every aspect of life. A person is first brought to extreme awareness of this in the teenage years while applying for college. The competition to get into an institution of renown gets fiercer each year. Parents and student scramble to experts and counselors and advisors for a formula. If I play the piano, join the swim team, attain a 4.0, and also win the state spelling bee all the while volunteering at the local hospital, will that be enough? No? But the neighbor’s daughter did none of that and was recruited by Stanford’s synchronized swim team’s coach since her team won the Junior Olympics in Moscow. The official reply any official will give you constitutes of something along the lines of telling you that they are looking for the “special” kid, the talented kid. <pregnant pause> Or was that the multi-talented kid?

I got into Stanford^*, and now I’m looking for a reputable internship with Goldman Sachs. I’ve got a 3.81 GPA as a junior status Finance major; I’m the president and founder of the Guitar Club, raised $3000 dollars last semester for disadvantaged youth in Paraguay, but she got the internship because she has a license in bartending^*? What is the world coming to? What does society today expect their citizens to know?

My prolonged reflection, unfortunately, has been unable to provide me with one satisfactory answer. I can only say that I am trying my hardest to know the basics of everything. I feel that any learned person of respectable academia, if for not one’s sake, but that of their own pride should pursue an education that would provide them with the opportunity to meet anyone and be able to converse for an extended amount of time with that person in said person’s choice of subjects. Personally, I find great pleasure in discussing advantages of trading over the counter stocks and options with a future Wall Street investor while holding my own with a humanities major regarding “Who is John Galt?” When I go home this weekend, I look forward to playing chess with my favorite uncle, who is less invested in guiding my future, because I know I shall be enlightened on the latest news in real estate.

None of this is said in arrogance or an air of haughtiness. It is merely that I take pleasure in surprising people with the amount that I know. It is true that when I meet the daughter of the family friend she will most certainly be able to tell me much about George Washington which I never knew, but I have confidence in my ability to engage in a prolonged discuss about the merits of Washington and his career with her. My love is not simply for the pursuit of the knowledge but in the sharing of the knowledge with any interested person, who will undoubtedly impart their learning with me as well.

*Statistics are for argument’s sake only.