The
knowledge claim that was explored was that scientists are now able to predict
momentary delight (a.k.a happiness) with an equation. This knowledge claim was found
in a BBC News article. This equation was created after a series of studies,
conducted both in a lab and through a smartphone app, apparently discovered an
equation that predicts when someone is going to be happy. However, right away,
one has to question: can you predict a feeling through a “law” from an area of
knowledge? If emotion is a way of knowing, it should be the one of the sources
of where our understanding of an area of knowledge comes. Once we eliminate
that “job” from a way of knowing, we interrupt a very important cycle of
acquiring new knowledge from an area of knowledge.
There are various explanations as to
how exactly these researchers’ methods worked, such as dopamine release in the
brain or how our mood is affected by expectations, rewards and past outcomes,
but it all leaves you a little bit in doubt. You have the proof that justifies
it and it has proved to be true with another 18,000 people, but it’s a bit hard
to believe. Therefore, this knowledge claim does not fit the conventional
definition of Plato’s truth. We use emotions (happiness in this case) to
understand the world around us, not as a category of specific knowledge.
Transforming that way of knowing into something computable, while obviously
possible, can seriously change everything. For example, this equation can be
used in other areas of knowledge such as Human Sciences and Faith. Once you
predict the supposed causes of an emotion, you no longer need these areas of
knowledge to explain how an emotion works.
Now that it’s become shared
knowledge on when a person can experience happiness, we can begin to control
our emotions. And if we do so, do we gain any knowledge from them anymore? If
we rely on past experiences to regulate when and how we become happy, we
shouldn’t be able to gain new experiences and perspectives from this way of
knowing. Keeping that in mind, is that a good enough justification for telling
and teaching people to control emotions? The answer is no, the spontaneity of
emotions is what has significantly helped mankind learn how to behave and how
to evolve. Elated feelings stemming from discovering new things would now become
a robotic and planned reaction, which eliminates a human’s curiosity to change
the world around them.
After reading this article, I think
the knowledge claim being made is valid and justified as it has a substantial
amount of evidence backing it up. However, I’m not entirely certain that
something as diverse and complex as happiness can be watered down into a matter
of expectations, rewards and past outcomes. Sure, this equation has predicted
happiness through those factors, but I’m not certain those are the only factors
that can affect happiness. Therefore, I’m not certain this claim is 100% accurate
because it’s impossible to predict something so important so easily. And while
the evidence is compelling, I feel that in order to truly understand just how accurate
this equation is, I’d need more evidence that hasn't been put into layman’s
terms for the general audience. Also, I would need to know more about emotions
within the brain to understand just what stimuli can affect happiness and how
such laboratory-produced stimuli can result in a natural feeling. If I knew
these things, I’d be better equipped to evaluate the claim being made in this
article.
Word Count: 593
No comments:
Post a Comment