The Importance of Inquiry

We all learn from our experiences. Over time, our experiences help us see patterns and predict what may happen and why. We desire to predict future circumstances. The better our observational and analytical skills, the better our predictions become. Even though our experiences play a central role, they are not the only factor. Other influences, including tradition and authority, have a significant impact on what we consider truth.

This is About Knowing

Not so much what we know, but how we know it. I’m not talking about things in a theoretical or philosophical sense, but literally how we know what we know and why we accept it as truth. For example, most people would agree that the earth is round. But how do you actually know? Maybe a teacher or a parent told you, or you read it in a textbook when you were a child.

We inherit a culture from our ancestors. Along with that comes accepted views of the world. Everybody knows the earth is round, right? It’s common sense. We don’t even question it. But how do we know? Unless you hop on a rocket and get a look for yourself, chances are you got this information from someone else and took it as truth. "Most of what we know is a matter of agreement and belief. Little of it is based on personal experience and discovery. A big part of growing up in any society is the process of learning to accept what others 'know' is so. If you don’t know these things, you can’t really be a part of the group."

We are taught to accept things and not question them. If you were to start asking, "Is the world really round?" people would look at you like you’re crazy. Push it too far, and you might find yourself waking up to padded walls every day. We know some things through our own experience and others by way of tradition and experts. When experience conflicts with what everyone knows, there is a good chance we will surrender our experience in favor of agreement.

The same things we think of as common sense today would be considered crazy by our ancestors. Galileo Galilei, a physicist and astronomer, challenged the belief at the time that the earth was flat. His views landed him in hot water with the church—not once, but twice! In 1616, he had been forbidden from holding or defending his belief. By 1633, he was tried for heresy.

For me, it is natural to seek growth and challenge my understanding. Over time, I learned that this sort of mindset is not common or encouraged. Why must we fight so hard for what we know is right? Why are people so willing to discredit themselves and toss aside their experiences in favor of society’s version of the truth? It angered me at times, witnessing people’s willful ignorance. My emotions blinded me and prevented me from understanding the role of tradition.

Tradition has its advantages. "By accepting what everybody knows, we avoid the overwhelming task of starting from scratch in our search for regularities and understanding." Imagine if we had to reinvent the wheel every generation. The advances we have today would not be possible. One could look at a gifted mind such as Elijah McCoy or Dr. Shirley Jackson and think that their genius is unique and completely original. After all, without Dr. Jackson, we might not have the touch-tone telephone, caller ID, or call waiting. Still, these accomplishments would not be possible without those who paved the way. In the words of Sir Isaac Newton, "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."

Tradition has its role. In the search for new knowledge, it serves as an excellent starting point. However, to build on that foundation, we must be brave enough to seek out new understanding—even if it means risking becoming the outcast for a time. Still, this brings me back to the question of how to determine what is truth. New knowledge appears every day. With advances in technology and the advent of social media, everyone has a platform to speak their views, and many of them speak their opinions as if they were gospel. Whether we choose to believe them or not often depends on their status. You’re more likely to believe health advice from your doctor than from your great-aunt Sue.

Taking into account the status of the source is helpful in filtering information, but just as with tradition, there are pros and cons. It makes sense to listen to one who has special training, expertise, or credentials in their field (e.g., law advice from a lawyer). Still, we must take into account that even experts make mistakes. Our understanding can also be limited when we listen to experts who are speaking outside their field—such as taking nutritional advice from a math teacher. The marketing industry takes full advantage of this. Many of us have, at one time or another, purchased a product or service because it was endorsed by a celebrity we like or trust, even if the product is more expensive than its competitors. More often than not, the person representing the product knows little about the inner workings of the company and is just saying what they were paid to say.

Human inquiry is not perfect. I started by asking, How is it that we know what we know? I took a look at the two most common ways: tradition (what is passed on to us) and authority (wisdom of the experts). I see that neither is perfect. They can provide us with a good starting point for conversation, but if we rely too heavily on either one, we may be led astray. I searched for answers and instead found more questions. It is clear to me that we must, at times, seek out our own understanding. In a future article, I will take a look at some of the roadblocks we face as we set out to learn for ourselves and suggest solutions to those problems.