Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?

This is the online Ancient Hebrew Bible that my dad uses to learn Ancient Hebrew to gain a deeper understanding of the text's original meaning. This is because the translations of the Bible into modern languages lose some of the nuances and complexities of the original language. This specific word highlighted is Yom which means day could mean a literal 24-hour day or an indefinite time period.

This object is an example of linguistic knowledge. This object shows how knowing the different meanings of the word ‘day’ doesn’t make you a better Christian than someone who doesn’t. Even though translations to English can lose some of the cultural connotations and the nuances associated with the words, you will still gain the same lesson as everybody else. This aspect of the object connects back to the question because it shows that learning Ancient Hebrew is not a prerequisite for spiritual growth and it doesn’t make your journey more meaningful. Additionally, the specific knowledge of the different meanings of the word "day" in the Bible doesn’t have any practical applications beyond theological debates or discussions. Unlike modern languages, Ancient Hebrew lacks practical utility for conversational purposes. Knowing the meaning or not knowing the meaning of the word will only influence your interpretation of biblical texts. By interpreting the word "day" in Ancient Hebrew to strictly mean sunrise to sunset, it can lead to the rejection of scientific theories such as evolution. But interpreting it this way doesn't significantly impact one's ability to contribute to society or how they practice the religion. Furthermore, our ability to contribute and participate in society doesn't depend on one's acceptance or rejection of specific scientific theories. This linguistic knowledge can be considered less significant as it lies predominantly in the realm of intellectual exploration and theological discourse rather than in practical everyday life.

This object is string theory. My brother and dad share an interest in physics. I would often find them reading about the basics of string theory in articles and research papers. At this stage, string theory is still highly speculative and the applications are primarily theoretical. Despite decades of research and exploration, there still needs to be definitive evidence to confirm or refute its validity.

This object links back to my prompt because this type of knowledge is considered speculative science. The speculative nature of string theory arises from the fact that it proposes a different understanding of the fundamental nature of the universe compared to traditional particle physics. It introduces the concept of strings as the constituents of matter and energy, in contrast to the point-like particles of the Standard Model (New Scientist). This move from conventional particle physics requires extensive theoretical exploration and empirical evidence to establish its validity. Without substantial advancements, applications of string theory such as black holes, dark matter, and unification of forces remain speculative and largely theoretical. This brings forth the question of how we evaluate the usefulness of knowledge with little observable evidence to support it.

General relativity is a classical theory, while quantum mechanics governs the behavior of particles at the smallest scales. Combining these two theories has been an ongoing challenge in physics. String theory provides a potential solution by incorporating both quantum mechanics and gravity, allowing physicists to explore the behavior of gravity at the quantum level and study phenomena such as black holes and the early universe. This further supports my exhibition because the speculative nature of string theory does not diminish its significance. Speculative science plays a crucial role in the advancement of knowledge by pushing the boundaries of established paradigms and stimulating further inquiry. This can be more useful than rigidly defined science, which solely focuses on immediate practical applications and definitive experimental validation.

This object is the pitch and yaw of a sailboat. My family went on multiple sailboats last summer and learning how to ride it was different for every boat we have been on. The pitch of a sailboat refers to the up-and-down motion of the boat's bow (front) and stern (rear). The pitching characteristics of a sailboat differ based on the hull shape, weight distribution, and sail plan. The yaw of the sailboat refers to the boat's side-to-side movement, it can differ based on various factors, including the design, hull shape, keel or centerboard type, and sail plan. The different configurations of the pitch and yaw in each sailboat can affect its stability of it.

When we tried to read about them online, we still weren’t able to control and stabilize the boat. Because of this, we had to hire someone from the shop that rented the sailboat to us. He was familiar with and had extensive knowledge of this specific model from sailing it multiple times. This has allowed him to develop a deeper understanding of that boat’s unique pitch and yaw characteristics. This object connects back to the prompt because it demonstrates how reading about pitch and yaw online can only provide a superficial understanding of these concepts. This is not as useful as experiential knowledge. When you start to sail, you can observe firsthand how your boat responds to various conditions. For example, how the boat responds to waves, wind shifts, and speed changes. As you spend more time sailing, you begin to develop an intuitive sense of your boat’s unique characteristics like its subtle movements, the shifts in weight, and the interplay between the sails and the water. This knowledge grants you the ability to anticipate the boat’s reactions and make timely adjustments.

“String Theory.” New Scientist, www.newscientist.com/definition/string-theory/. Accessed 26 May 2023.