Is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge?

Discuss with reference

to two areas of knowledge

Duplication of knowledge has induced efficient human race advancements over time, and it is
yet to stop. In this essay the prompt: “Is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge?”
will be explored. Replicability can be defined in different ways for each AoK but generally, it is the
quality for a piece of knowledge to be reproduced or recreated with the goal of forming or
understanding knowledge. Knowledge production is based on observations and experiments that
create new understanding and ways of seeing the world. In this essay, the AoK explored are natural
sciences and the Arts. The question is limited by the word ‘necessary’ since it restricts what is
classified in knowledge production. In the natural sciences, practical replicability is supportive
because it proves that the scientific idea is reliable regardless of who is doing it or when they are
doing it. However, its necessity in the production of knowledge is questionable. In the Arts,
practical replicability identifies ways a piece of art can be redone to make new pieces that are
unidentifiable from the previous that can also create new forms of knowledge, but it is not truly
necessary.

Replicability affects the certainty of knowledge in natural sciences. For something to be true or
authentic in the natural sciences, it has to be backed with empirical evidence, this is why it is
recommended that it to has1 been repeated or redone with the same methodology and procedures
in experiments and observations in the sense of allowing the knower to feel that there is no room
for error or argument. For example, the theory of relativity was first proposed by Albert Einstein
between 1905 and 1915, which is more than a century ago the proposed theories have been tested
in various ways in their time by scientists to test if the suggested ideas are truthful and reliable.
Since the theory is too complex for scientists to just conform and agree with it, it has been
necessary for them to use the scientific method to classify Einstein’s theory with a degree of
truthfulness. Lately, scientists have put the theory into rigorous tests and proven it to be true to a
remarkable degree. 1A team of scientists wanted to test the weak equivalence principle, a
component of Einstein’s theory of general relativity that suggests that entities of any mass or
composition should free-fall similarly in particular gravitational fields. The Apollo 15 moonwalk
was one of the most famous ways this theory was tested when the astronaut David Scott dropped a
hammer and a feather at the same time and they accelerated toward the moon's surface at the same
rate. Through empiricism and visual observation, Einstein’s theory was yet again proven to be
correct. Its replicability was helpful in impacting the credibility or trust scientists put into
Einstein’s hypothesis and can be considered a crucial part of the scientific method.

1 Lea, R. (2022) Einstein's greatest theory just passed its most rigorous test yet, Scientific American. Scientific
American. Available at: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/einsteins-greatest-theory-just-passed-its-most-
rigorous-test-yet/#:~:text=Scientists%20have%20demonstrated%20that%20Einstein's,for%20more%20than%20a
%20century.(Accessed: February 9, 2023).
 Another example of how replicability can affect the certainty or reliability of scientific
suggestions is 2the DNA double helix structure experiment proposed by James Watson and Francis
Crick. They proposed the structure of DNA based on the X-ray crystallography of other
scientists(Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins) which led them to come up with data that
would help them create the idea of the DNA structure as a double helix. Since this information
was massively important in the history of biology scientists questioned the truth and credibility of
this suggestion for the safety of their future experiments using this information. This scenario has a
similar approach to the first one because scientific knowledge requires credibility and without
replication, scientists would find it hard to make progress since the information wouldn't evoke a
sense of trust.

A counterclaim can be that some things cannot be easily replicated but they still contribute
important knowledge in the natural sciences. The natural sciences have a large scope and being able
to replicate certain phenomena can prove to be quite difficult, this is why certain knowledge in the
natural sciences has been sourced once and has not been duplicated or redone. For example 3the
observation of the collision of two neutron stars, which occurred on August 17, 2017. Neutron
stars are the incredibly dense cores left behind after a supernova explosion. When these stars
eventually collide after orbiting each other they burst to produce electromagnetic signals and
gravitational waves. This was the first and probably the last time such a phenomenon will occur in
my lifetime. This event can not be replicated since we do not have the scientific advancement to
recreate it. The collision meets the criteria of being a reliable and valid source of information due to
the use of rigorous scientific methods such as observation through the Fermi Gamma-ray Space
Telescope. The results also follow certain credible theories such as Einstein’s theory of general
relativity, which is why this observation can be considered the production of knowledge regardless
of its replicability. Therefore it is possible to say that replicability is an important feature in the
natural sciences since it eases the credibility and reliability of knowledge in science, but it is not
necessary for the production of knowledge in the natural sciences when rigorous scientific methods
are followed.

In the Arts, the value of art lies in its uniqueness and emotional impact on the audience
rendering practical replicability useless. The creative process of producing art involves unique
expressions of creativity, emotion, and individual perspective, which can not be precisely
replicated. Even when the pieces are visually indistinguishable there is a sense of plagiarism that
rises when an art piece evokes similar emotions and thoughts in the audience. For example “Starry
2 The discovery of The double helix, 1951-1953 | Francis Crick - profiles in Science. (n.d.). Retrieved February 16,
2023, from https://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/spotlight/sc/feature/doublehelix
3 Johnston, H. (2018) Spectacular collision of two neutron stars observed for first time, Physics World. Available at:
https://physicsworld.com/a/spectacular-collision-of-two-neutron-stars-observed-for-first-time/ (Accessed: February
21, 2023).
Night” by Vincent van Gogh is a great example of how visual features of an art piece can be
replicated but the emotions and perspective are difficult to replicate since they are specific to each
artist. The painting is known for its unique style, with swirling, dream-like strokes of paint that
create an intense emotional impact on the viewer. The brushstrokes are a way to convey his
emotions and perspectives on the world. It is possible to replicate this piece using similar
techniques and make it indistinguishable but the artist will not evoke similar emotions or reactions
as the ones Van Gogh did. Another example can be the literate novel “Beloved” by Toni Morrison
which is about the psychological trauma of slavery and the way it impacts. The use of piercing
language and magical realism make this novel truly special and highly emotional and these features
make it hard for the piece to be replicated in terms of the impact on the reader. Replicability is not
necessary in the production of knowledge in literature, as the value of the work lies in its ability to
convey a unique emotional impact and perspective on the world.

A counterclaim to this can be that while emotional impact and unique expressions are important
features in the Arts, the ability to replicate a work of art can be a valuable source of knowledge.
The ability to replicate art pieces creates new forms of knowledge when one explores the
techniques, materials, and historical context of the piece. These insights can be helpful in
producing knowledge based on the preceding artist’s ideas. An example can be the replication of
the frescoes by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel in Rome. 4The piece was suffering from
significant damage due to environmental factors and other restoration attempts. In order to
preserve the frescoes, conservators used laser scanning and digital imaging to create high-quality
copies of these pieces. It was important to differentiate these new pieces from the original due to
plagiarism purposes. This demonstrates how replicability of knowledge in the arts can be helpful in
the production of knowledge due to how the techniques used by previous artists can help preserve
their art pieces and give important insight into how current pieces can also be preserved. Hence we
can say that replicability is not necessary for the production of knowledge in the Arts since
emotion and creativity are important criteria in the Arts and they are not easily replicable, but the
replicability of an art piece can be important because it gives insights into the artist’s techniques
and materials which can help future artists and audiences.

The question is limited by the word ‘necessary’ which implies that replicability has to be essential
or indispensable in the production of knowledge. Replicability depends on the AoK being used
since the Wok is different for each, which carries the weight of how necessary it is in the
production of knowledge. In the natural sciences replicability is an important feature because it
contributes to the reliability and credibility of the hypothesis or idea but it is not necessary for the
production of knowledge because reliable scientific knowledge can be produced using rigorous

4 Cascone, S. (2019) Preserving the sistine chapel is a never-ending task. see stunning behind-the-scenes photos of
what it takes, Artnet News. Available at: https://news.artnet.com/art-world/conservation-sistine-chapel-1499899
(Accessed: February 21, 2023).
scientific methods. In the Arts, emotion and creativity are important criteria for the depth of an art
piece so replicability is not necessary, but replicability can prove to be helpful when producing new
forms of knowledge based on the techniques and materials used on prior art pieces. Therefore,
replicability can be classified as a supportive feature for different AoK and its importance in the
production of knowledge also depends on the Aok.

Word Count: 1538

Bibliography

● Lea, R. (2022) Einstein's greatest theory just passed its most rigorous test yet, Scientific American.
Scientific American. Available at: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/einsteins-greatest-
theory-just-passed-its-most-rigorous-test-yet/#:~:text=Scientists%20have%20demonstrated%20that
%20Einstein's,for%20more%20than%20a%20century. (Accessed: February 9, 2023).

● The discovery of The double helix, 1951-1953 | Francis Crick - profiles in Science. (n.d.). Retrieved
February 16, 2023, from https://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/spotlight/sc/feature/doublehelix

● Johnston, H. (2018) Spectacular collision of two neutron stars observed for first time, Physics
World. Available at: https://physicsworld.com/a/spectacular-collision-of-two-neutron-stars-
observed-for-first-time/ (Accessed: February 21, 2023).

● Cascone, S. (2019) Preserving the sistine chapel is a never-ending task. see stunning behind-the-
scenes photos of what it takes, Artnet News. Available at:
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/conservation-sistine-chapel-1499899 (Accessed: February 21,
2023).