"One way to assure the health of a discipline is to
nurture contrasting perspectives." Discuss this claim.
Word count: 1,636
The Holocaust was the mass murder and persecution of millions of Jews by the
Nazi regime.
I used to carry this piece of knowledge without awareness of its true weight. It was only
when hearing a speech regarding the Shoah that I felt for the rst time like I understood
the Holocaust. The personal insights of broken survivors was an emotional challenge that
opened my eyes and gave me a richer perspective on the topic. This made me aware that
knowledge is strengthened through challenge. Emotion is a motivator with the power to
create deep meaning. Now, whenever I think about the Holocaust, I tap not only to the
information, but to my emotions which nourish my knowledge, making it healthier.
In humans, health is related to longevity, thus it is possible to argue a ‘healthy’ discipline
is that which perseveres through time. However, longevity alone might not be easy to put
to practice given as experts from the same discipline may disagree when reaching a
conclusion. When di erent perspectives stem from strong moral, personal or religious
values, these can contradict each other. Knowledge within disciplines naturally forms
intricate networks, would that indicate the longevity of knowledge increases its value?
Within scienti c domains, many see contrasting perspectives as vital for the creation of
knowledge. An example of this is medicine. Often, when diagnosing a complicated case,
doctors gather to debate before reaching a consensus or agreeing on a diagnosis: validity
in this case depends on the interaction within the network of knowledge, even if the rst
diagnosis is not correct. Recently, the idea of a more elaborate, precise and patient-
centred approach has been implemented in medicine. That being said, how might a
holistic and multidisciplinary approach contribute to contrasting perspectives? Following
science’s empirical nature, through reason and logic, observations and more, data is
collected, analysed and conclusions are reached. Specialists sometimes interpret things
di erently, which leads to debates in which opposing viewpoints will defend their position
with evidence and often try to weaken the other. Controversy in this scenario is a positive
given as it encourages the questioning and testing of ideas and motivates further
research so that when a consensus is reached, one can be con dent the wining argument
was thoroughly analysed and tackled from di erent approaches.
A holistic approach in medicine includes the involvement of many specialists, ranging
from doctors, to nurses and psychologists. Throughout collaboration, this team creates a
more e ective healthcare service for the patient. Some could potentially say the
ff
ff fi ff ff fi fi fi
nurture contrasting perspectives." Discuss this claim.
Word count: 1,636
The Holocaust was the mass murder and persecution of millions of Jews by the
Nazi regime.
I used to carry this piece of knowledge without awareness of its true weight. It was only
when hearing a speech regarding the Shoah that I felt for the rst time like I understood
the Holocaust. The personal insights of broken survivors was an emotional challenge that
opened my eyes and gave me a richer perspective on the topic. This made me aware that
knowledge is strengthened through challenge. Emotion is a motivator with the power to
create deep meaning. Now, whenever I think about the Holocaust, I tap not only to the
information, but to my emotions which nourish my knowledge, making it healthier.
In humans, health is related to longevity, thus it is possible to argue a ‘healthy’ discipline
is that which perseveres through time. However, longevity alone might not be easy to put
to practice given as experts from the same discipline may disagree when reaching a
conclusion. When di erent perspectives stem from strong moral, personal or religious
values, these can contradict each other. Knowledge within disciplines naturally forms
intricate networks, would that indicate the longevity of knowledge increases its value?
Within scienti c domains, many see contrasting perspectives as vital for the creation of
knowledge. An example of this is medicine. Often, when diagnosing a complicated case,
doctors gather to debate before reaching a consensus or agreeing on a diagnosis: validity
in this case depends on the interaction within the network of knowledge, even if the rst
diagnosis is not correct. Recently, the idea of a more elaborate, precise and patient-
centred approach has been implemented in medicine. That being said, how might a
holistic and multidisciplinary approach contribute to contrasting perspectives? Following
science’s empirical nature, through reason and logic, observations and more, data is
collected, analysed and conclusions are reached. Specialists sometimes interpret things
di erently, which leads to debates in which opposing viewpoints will defend their position
with evidence and often try to weaken the other. Controversy in this scenario is a positive
given as it encourages the questioning and testing of ideas and motivates further
research so that when a consensus is reached, one can be con dent the wining argument
was thoroughly analysed and tackled from di erent approaches.
A holistic approach in medicine includes the involvement of many specialists, ranging
from doctors, to nurses and psychologists. Throughout collaboration, this team creates a
more e ective healthcare service for the patient. Some could potentially say the
ff
ff fi ff ff fi fi fi
