Argument Between The Apple Company And The Federal Bureau Of Investigations

Gabriel Sapien
Mrs. O'Rourke
IB Theory of Knowledge
12 January 2016
Disagreement Between Experts
There are many scenarios in which two expert parties are given the same facts, but still manage to disagree on the discipline. The two areas of knowledge relating to this idea are the human sciences and ethics. The two ways of knowing corresponding to the subject are perception and reasoning. Three key examples provide evidence that state that two expert parties can disagree on a discipline even though they are given the same facts. The first is the argument between the Apple company and the Federal Bureau of Investigations. The second is Trump’s and Hillary’s point of views on foreign policy. The last example is Trump’s perspective on immigration

Both areas of knowledge, human sciences and ethics, play a major role in explaining why experts would disagree on a topic even though they are provided with the same information. For example, the human sciences consists of how the human brain thinks, interprets, and analyzes. This is where the way of knowing, perception, comes into play as well. For example, the two expert parties have two different perspectives and psychological mentalities on the same topic. Ethics also plays a role in deciding whether which choice is the right or wrong answer. Ethics is the idea of being morally right. There are ethicists who provide what they think best is the right choice, but everyone has their different idea of what is right so there are arguments. One key world situation that is used as evidence for this statement is the argument between Apple and the F.B.I. over deciding whether to unlock the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone. Both Apple and the Federal Bureau of Investigations knew that the iPhone had information on future terrorism, so this piece was the fact that both expert parties were given. The F.B.I. wanted the Apple company to manually unlock the iPhone in order to unlock terrorism secrets that the

As discussed before, perception and psychology is apart of human sciences describing how humans think and perceive stimuli. Reasoning is the way of knowledge that describes how humans perceive and interpret information. One world situation exemplifying this idea is Donald Trump’s and Hillary Clinton’s idea on foreign policy. Both of the presidential candidates know the same information specifically on terrorism and Isis. Also, both of these political experts understand the danger and threat behind terrorism on the United States. This fact of Isis’ existence would be the fact that Clinton and Trump both know and must agree on. However, the two do not agree on how to treat and dissolve this threat of terrorism. However, the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, plans to establish a no fly zone over Syria in order to help dissolve Isis as a threat. Businessman, Donald Trump, thinks that this idea is ridiculous because it will only anger Russia by restricting them on where they fly and the U.S. and them are not very good friends. This shows that the reasoning and perception behind each of these two experts can skew the way they think based off of the same facts and information they were provided with. Coming from two different political parties, a democrat and republican will have