Title 6 – KQ 2 : How far do contrasting perspectives assure health of discipline?
KQ 2 : How far do contrasting perspectives assure health of discipline?
The world around us consists of multidimensional , complex , dynamic and interconnected systems that necessitates knowing and understanding built through multiple claims and counterclaims/conflicting claims. There lies an inherent value in getting to know the ‘other side’ of the argument. Not only the claims and counterclaims stand to persevere from scrutiny and exploration, the resulting outcome is based on a well balanced and robust foundation.
This examination through contrasting perspectives entails deeper recognition and judgment instead of mere accommodation. Taking for instance, Theory building or Theory change in Natural and Human sciences involve a community process of sharing experiments, observations, feedback and interpreting the data in distinct ways and in varied settings. The process requires prolonged deliberation that often sparks scientific controversy as witnessed in case of any ground breaking theoretical idea.
The scientific controversies involve strong disagreements either over the interpretation of the data, availability of conclusive evidence to support the idea or future investigation and yet the discussion and debate to overcome opposition is what persuades the entire scientific community for the theory or the idea to be ‘convincing’ if not ‘infallible’.