Knowledge is true opinion. This saying of Plato really struck my senses, as I had always received knowledge from a higher authority, from teachers at school to elders in my religious society. However, through collective opinion, we get a diverse response from many people, eventually gaining validity in knowledge. This could happen through agreements between many members of an industry, thus reaching a consensus. The consensus theory of truth states that something is true if a large number of people agree that it is true. On the other hand, conflicting opinions and disagreements could also be a form of knowledge induction. Then I asked myself: what is the role of external opinion in influencing our perception of knowledge? Is gaining knowledge from opinions better than what I am currently learning? We can say that knowledge is robust when it is supported or validated by reliable sources, or according to Karl Popper when knowledge can be falsified. The more a theory has been questioned and debated and has withstood these disagreements, the more solid it is. This then leads me to discuss the statement that “sound knowledge requires both consensus and disagreement.” I will discuss this statement across the natural sciences, as consensus and disagreement are used frequently, and across indigenous knowledge systems, to evaluate how my current way of acquiring knowledge compares to what we discuss in the natural sciences. to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Scientific consensus can be defined as the collective judgment, position, and opinion of the community of scientists in a particular field of study. To judge a scientific theory, a consensus is used to validate it. Plato's definition of knowledge as "justified true belief of knowledge" states that if a proposition is true, the subject believes in the proposition and is justified in his beliefs. However, Karl Popper opposed this system by stating that for a scientific theory to be truly scientific, it must be possible to falsify it. If this is not possible, then the theory may reside in the realm of supernatural, superstitious, or faith-based areas, thus calling it Falsification Theory. He explains this theory by stating that to create knowledge, claims must be criticized rather than justified. This is because justifications will eventually turn into circular arguments, where there would be infinite justifications for a statement. Rather, by falsifying and criticizing existing knowledge we are able to strengthen the theory. In this way we arrive at the question: “To what extent does the falsifiability of knowledge influence its robustness?” consensus is found in the field of climate and in the general judgment of scientists among other scientists regarding the extent of global warming, its probable causes and its possible consequences. The scientific consensus among scientists is that it is extremely likely that global warming is caused by humans, by increased concentrations of greenhouse gases due to the burning of fossil fuels. Associations such as the American Association of the Advancement of Science, the National Academy of Science of the United States, to name a few, have explicitly used the word "consensus" in their statements regarding the issue of global warming. Visual sense perceptions, seeing satellite images, and scientific interpretations of these findings have led to such.