There are sufficient compelling claims to support the fact that irrational disagreement is marred with availability bias. The reason behind the claim is that the experts use the recent and similar conditions and they apply the knowledge on solving the problem on their hands.it is noted that the consequences of the outcome are not considered, but the decisions are overruled by emotions. The experts, for instance, do not consider the effect of adopting uniform dressing code in religious knowledge system. Irrational disagreement hides the reality and becomes a barrier to a successful decision. The result is that the experts make decisions which are detrimental with no logical and factual grounds. Irrational disagreement proves to be a rapid response to a problem and does not allow the use of accepted sequence of problem-solving. The solution to the problem results due to response to physiological conditions or factors and the physical environment.
Rational disagreement occurs when the experts in the same field disagree on a matter that has been analyzed on the logical and factual basis. Irrational disagreement on the other hand occurs when the experts on the same field disagree on a matter that has been analyzed based on emotions of the experts.
The Relationship between Fact and Theory
A disagreement between experts on the same field is inevitable when the experts fail to agree on a matter regarded as a fact and a theory. Notably, the terms fact and theory are used together in various studies. However, there are some differences which make each term distinct. Failure to appreciate the meaning of each term while finding a solution to a problem will result in a disagreement between experts in that area of knowledge (AOK).
A fact refers to something that has been sufficiently proven, and there are enough evidence that support that something is either true or not true. A fact is regarded as truth and reflects the reality, and the concept has been understood in details. Additionally, experts consider relevant aspects, details and the relations which pertain a problem. A group of similar facts forms a concept. A concept refers to a representation of similar facts which are aimed at solving a particular problem. Experts are required to gather facts in religious knowledge systems from the various religious denomination and ethical codes in different environment before making their final presentation. Concepts help in building up facts. The analysis of concepts on the basis of concepts helps the experts to classify facts assist the researcher in interpreting the facts. Proper interpretation of facts aids the experts in unraveling a particular experience and trend of events.
A note, however, should be taken that facts are often contextual and the knowledge evolves and develops.in particular, the something that proved to be true coupled with sufficient supportive evidence sometimes turns to be false or far from the truth. In most occasions, scientific facts proved to be true, proven and considered to be true turns to be false. Experts need to find a basis in which something is regarded as a fact and stipulates the limits of the fact.
A theory refers to something that the experts think that it is true, but it has not yet been tested to be true. A theory is a condition and position of the knowledge before subjecting it to testing and confirmation. Precisely, theory refers to a collection of relevant facts with similar relations and properties. A theory is established after the experts do an actual observation of particular facts and even reveal information on some unobserved facts. The act is achieved by employing the techniques of generalization and concepts. The outcome should, however, prove to be valid and empirical.in essence, a theory explains to an observation that was made. The observations made can be accepted or rejected. A repeated observation and experimentation provide more information about a concept which was originally observed. The results of the repeated observation and experimentation provide enough and supportive evidence for the concept to be regarded as a theory.
A theory sometimes is assumed to be true given that the supportive evidence available is almost hundred percent true. In this case, a theory is regarded as truth even if the supportive claims are speculated statements or agreements agreed by the experts. In ethical issues decent dressing in an office, for instance, is a theory which has been regarded as truth since criteria for establishing casual and official dressing is a mere speculation. A theory is statements which need to be subjected to vary tests for it to be accepted or refuted. A disagreement between experts working on the same discipline occurs when the experts fail to determine something which is a fact and a theory.
Common Access and Common Perception of Facts
A disagreement between experts in the same field is also witnessed when the experts have differences in the understanding of common accessed and commonly perceived facts. Common access to facts refers to factual information which is based on truth which has passed the test of time and logics. Common access to facts includes the facts that are generally known by the public and have been accepted for legal reference. The facts reveal the raw information on how the concept is and it is universally accepted.
The religious knowledge system, for instance, acknowledges that the religious denomination promotes peace among their neighbors. In ethical issues, the common access facts are that eating while walking is not ethical. The common access facts are also scientifically proved to be true. The current generation, however, provides various ways of establishing the truth behind the information. Common access facts give no room for misleading views and opinions but it holds on factual aspects of the matter.
The common perception of facts refers to experts' own analyzing and interpretation of a situation. Common perception varies from one expert to another expert. The information is based on the prior outlook and knowledge of the expert. The common perception is drawn from the interpretation of realities and common access facts. In accordance with religious knowledge system, the common perception of fact is that all Muslims are responsible for the attack in the western states. The information is based on a perception since not all Muslims are radicals. The common perception of facts distorts the reality of the facts. The common perception of facts proves to be the same across a lot of people. The media houses and stereotypes have a lot of impact the experts' perceptions. Human beings tend to remember and accept the information which confirms what they already know. New knowledge and interpretations of facts are however refuted. As a result, beliefs and ideologies affect the perceptions of the experts. The difference in common accessed and commonly perceived facts create a disagreement between experts in the same field is an appropriate procedure arriving at the solution is not adopted.
The information generated above lends convincing instances where the disagreement between experts in the same discipline occurs despite being provided with the same facts.
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SuperbGrade website, please click below to request its removal:
- Paper Example on ADHD and the Zombie Phenomenon
- Relationship Between Language and Culture
- Political Economy and Environment of North America
- Research: The Competitiveness of the Istanbul Hub Airport
- Medical Essay on Vaccinations and Immunizations
- Development Stages and Attachment Types
- Demand Meets Supply
- Public Personnel Administration Practice
- Essay on Plato's Allegory of the Cave
- Critical Literacy
- Law School Personal Statement
- Characteristics of a Dystopian Society