gre writing issue sample writing 33
- As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more complex and mysterious.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Does knowledge render things more comprehensible, or more complex and mysterious? In my view the acquisition of knowledge brings about all three at the same time. This paradoxical result is aptly explained and illustrated by a number of advances in our scientific knowledge.
Consider, for example, the sonar system on which blind bats rely to navigate and especially to seek prey. Researchers have learned that this system is startlingly sophisticated. By emitting audible sounds, then processing the returning echoes, a bat can determine in a nanosecond not only how far away its moving prey is but also the prey's speed, direction, size and even species. This knowledge acquired helps explain, of course, how bats navigate and survive. Yet at the same time this knowledge points out the incredible complexity of the auditory and brain functions of certain animals, even of mere humans, and creates a certain mystery and wonder about how such systems ever evolved organically.
Or consider our knowledge of the universe. Advances in telescope and space-exploration technology seem to corroborate the theory of a continually expanding universe that began at the very beginning of time with a "big bang." On one level this knowledge, assuming it qualifies as such, helps us comprehend our place in the universe and our ultimate destiny. Yet on the other hand it adds yet another chapter to the mystery about what existed before time and the universe.
Or consider the area of atomic physics. The naked human eye perceives very little, of course, of the complexity of matter. To our distant ancestors the physical world appeared simple--seemingly comprehensible by means of sight and touch. Then by way of scientific knowledge we learned that all matter is comprised of atoms, which are further comprised of protons, neutrons, and electrons. Then we discovered an even more basic unit of matter called the quark. And now a new so-called "string" theory posits the existence of an even more fundamental, and universal, unit of matter. On the one hand, these discoveries have rendered things more comprehensible, by explaining and reconciling empirical observations of how matter behaves. The string theory also reconciles the discrepancy between the quantum and wave theories of physics. On the other hand, each discovery has in turn revealed that matter is more complex than previously thought. In fact, the string theory, which is theoretically sound, calls for seven more dimensions---in addition to the three we already know about! I'm hard-pressed to imagine anything more complex or mysterious.
In sum, the statement overlooks a paradox about knowledge acquired, at least when it comes to understanding the physical world. When through knowledge a thing becomes more comprehensible and explainable we realize at the same time that it is more complex and mysterious than previously thought. -----------------
The speaker asserts that gaining knowledge tends to make us feel uneasiness rather than certainty. In some sense, it is true that things become more complex and ambiguous as we are exposed to new information and different perspectives. Only by exaggerating the initial displacement caused by new knowledge, however, the speaker is overlooking the more important contributions of gaining new knowledge made to our understanding; increase in accuracy of our decision and supplement of our opinion with valuable criticisms.
Of course, it is undeniable that we are, sometimes, likely to be confused and embarrassed when we meet most of totally innovative and radical knowledge. Especially when the existing systems are considered tolerable and effective, people tend to show more indifference or even hostility than sympathetic adoption to every type of new knowledge and perspectives. In politics, for example, the new concept of civil equality and abolishment coined by Abraham Lincoln encountered public resistance and even hostility related partly to public’s embarrassment about the new concept of politics. In our daily lives, we tend to snub the innovative ideas and technologies partly because we do not want to be tangled by the burden to understand the new system even when they are known to be more effective and beneficial than the existing systems. This suggests that new knowledge produces more suspicion, discomfit, and uncertainty than reassurance.