Reply To: Any piece of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted, since it may well be proven false in the future. Reason: Much of the information that people assume is factual actually turns out to be inaccurate.
TOEFL, IELTS, Personal Statement and CV Proofreading Services. › GRE Writing › Any piece of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted, since it may well be proven false in the future. Reason: Much of the information that people assume is factual actually turns out to be inaccurate. › Reply To: Any piece of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted, since it may well be proven false in the future. Reason: Much of the information that people assume is factual actually turns out to be inaccurate.
University: Minzu University of China
Nowadays, media covers every aspect of society; we are inevitably receiving numerous information day in and day out. While people always find some information turns out to be false or inaccurate over time, the assertion is still an unfair generalization to disbelieve every piece of information in life. In my view, we should examine the claim on a case-by-case basis.
Admittedly, the information in some domains is always changeable, say, science and technology. The phenomenon involves the very nature of science: it requires researchers to challenge the current theories and break new ground, resulting in that scientific theories are updating all the time. For instance, during the Middle Age, the geocentric model, proclaiming that the earth is the center of the universe, had been so popular that even endorsed by the Catholic Church, at least not until Nicolaus Copernicus questioned it. He challenged the previous theory and proposed a new one in which the sun is the center of the universe. Ever since his speculation had been agreed with by later scientists and became the mainstream belief until the development of astronomy and the measurement equipment in the 20th century proved there is no center in the universe because the universe expands from the Big Bang.
However, when it comes to other domains, the claim is questionable because those facts seldom change. In history, for instance, the events which have happened are impossible to be altered, but what always changes is views toward certain occasions and the figures related to the events. In the past, European Media and historians viewed Napoleon, a French military leader in the early 19th century, as a ruthless tyrant for his conquests of other European countries and northern Africa. There was a twist of his image in the 20th century, starting from the historians who turned to admire his talented military skill and achievement in promoting democracy to the world. Consequently, films and novels have been depicted him as a tragic hero who lost the war instead of an ambitious warmonger who intended to rule the entire Europe, which leads to a shift of view in ordinary people. From this point of view, the statement is hardly justifiable.
While the world is ever-changing in terms of technology improvements, political systems, and business models, human beings’ nature has been unalterable, transcending the time, no matter how advanced science has been or how democratic the society has become. Therefore, the information which taught us that human nature would never change is always a solid fact. For example, Crime and violence, which stem from certain aspects of human nature-such as aggression and greed, have troubled almost every society at any age. Therefore, what we have learned from the past about human nature can help us study criminal psychology, resulting in successfully preventing future crimes.
In conclusion, while I agree that information in certain areas like science and technology is frequently updating over time, some information and knowledge are always unchangeable and worth believing.