Student 41

This object is my violin that I have played on since 5th grade. It is the medium to which I express my musicality to relieve stress and transfer the stories of other composers. As I acquire more knowledge on violin techniques and music theory, I find that releasing my emotions through my instrument comes more with ease. This is because a larger collection of knowledge allows for more efficiency and precision. In fact, this knowledge would fall under the arts AOK as the knowledge is consistently up to interpretation and regards the discipline of music.

When I first learned how to play my violin, I learned the basic skills to produce a solid sound. Although these skills were relatively true to set the foundation for my violin career, my career would not be able to progress without extensions to this basic knowledge. While the knowledge of how to hold the violin is necessary for any first time violinist, it is not objective because there are alterations that come with further improvement. For instance, being taught how to hold the violin in a certain universal position is helpful at first, but getting more comfortable playing might allow one to want to slightly switch the way they hold their instrument to best fit their body while still incorporating elements of the original knowledge they were exposed to.

Ergo, my violin illustrates how knowledge fails to hold the title of “objective” because certain knowledge can be built upon to be more factual–or closer to fully objective–considering both that individuals have their own preferences, and there are always new approaches to discover.

This object is my notebook from sophomore year when I was in a chemistry course. The knowledge within this notebook falls under the natural sciences AOK considering that chemistry regards laws of nature on a molecular and chemical basis. One branch of knowledge found in this notebook is the history of the atom, more specifically theories regarding its structure.

The notebook touches on how in 1803, John Dalton theorized that atoms differ depending on the element, and that they are indivisible. This model was accepted as objective knowledge in the chemistry world until 1904 when JJ Thomson improved Dalton’s theory by postulating the existence of a subatomic particle, electrons. Similarly, other notable scientists expanded and disproved portions of the previous chemist’s ideas until Erwin Schrödinger proposed the current accepted model where there is a nucleus with protons and neutrons with a cloud of electrons surrounding it (“Models of the Atom Timeline”). Today, scientists accept Schrödinger’s model as knowledge; however, the model cannot be objective considering the complicated history behind how many aspects of the so-called “objective” knowledge of atomic structure have been invalidated.

Despite the objective credibility of knowledge in the natural sciences, knowledge cannot be objective because there is always room for growth even if knowledge seems to make the most sense, and the structure of an atom recorded in my notebook is a prime example of that. This object also brings artists’ responsibility into question by determining whether scientists like Dalton have an obligation to perfect their discoveries by approaching knowledge with as much objectivity as plausible; conversely, Dalton could have acknowledged that objectivity is not possible in knowledge production, so he believed he was justified in promptly accepting any new findings as knowledge with solely the evidence available.

This object is my globe my parents gave me as a gift 5 years ago. This globe mainly transfers knowledge regarding planet earth’s shape along with the location of diplomatic borders on its land. This knowledge regards the optional theme of politics as it demonstrates lands that individuals have claimed sovereignty to and the sovereignty of other groups they recognize. The knowledge that a portion of land is under a certain government’s sovereignty is not objective because anyone can disapprove of who really “owns” what land. These globemakers recognize Taiwan as sovereign while many individuals consider it part of China. Therefore, cultural differences hinder our ability to approach knowledge with objectivity in a human geographical sense.

Moreover, the majority of individuals originally believed Earth was flat, so their power–taking into account they were the majority–undermined humanity’s ability to be more objective about Earth’s shape. Nevertheless, this has later been disproven which is why my globe is spherical. However, when it was first determined that Earth was relatively spherical, no one could say the exact shape of the earth down to the very inch of sea-level at any given point. Therefore, knowledge on what something “is not” can be objective as we can confidently say the earth is not flat; whereas, knowledge on what “is'' can be improved upon endlessly. Namely, new technology like the altimeter was invented that can measure altitude and officially record depressions, mountains, etc. that do not make Earth perfectly spherical.

Altogether, my globe illustrates how there are two branches of knowledge. The branch regarding truth cannot be objective as there is always room to grow regardless of the quality/quantity of evidence available; on-the-other-hand, the branch regarding falsehood can rarely be irrefutable with genuine and non-contradictory evidence.