IntroductionKnowledge is acquired through one’s experiences or one’s education. A person faces countless arguments that may lead to agreements and disagreements when formulating a firm understanding. The statement, “robust knowledge requires both consensus and disagreement” then suggests that developing solid comprehension is not possible without debating on the facts and information at hand. Furthermore, evaluating this claim would question the extent to which knowledge acquired can be deemed logical and unbiased. Moreover, an assumption of this claim would bring about the question whether the pursuit of knowledge can be reliable based on experiences. Consequently, both of these knowledge questions can recognize the influence of reason in Natural Sciences and memory in History along with other factors that imply the need for debate.Natural SciencesBased on the standpoint of Natural Sciences, gathering needed facts is essential in devising coherent information. Furthermore, such information is leaning towards manifestation and verification given the influence of reason, and the way Natural Sciences has been continuously developing. Knowledge about the study of the physical world is reliable on logical reasoning, which questions the extent to which knowledge acquired in natural sciences is dependent on reason. With the given question, it can be said that knowledge acquired in Natural Sciences can be regarded as logical and unbiased to the facts due to the influence of reason that avoids scientific speculations to hinder the concepts of knowledge formulated through systematic reasoning thus, developing robust understanding. Given the dependence of reason, scientists and researchers make use of the scientific method wherein a set procedure consisting of systematic observation, testing, experimenting and modifying hypothesis is carried out (Dictionary, 2017). Thus, reason is used in the application of Natural Sciences to reach a conclusion. For instance, the debate on the existence of Dark Matter wherein several scientists have been speculating on the non luminous matter that hypothesize exists in space. A question arose amongst individuals “Why is dark matter theory accepted?” since the theory does not provide definite proof of the existence of such entity (StackExchange, 2015). Scientists state that Dark Matter is accounted for the unexplained effects of gravitational lensing, speed of expansion of the universe, and the rotation of galaxies however, a theory only exists if it withstands the test of reasoning. Over several years, every experiment has failed to indicate the existence of Dark Matter (New Scientist, 2016). According to an article from New Scientist, the scientific method has been successful in accepting or rejecting a hypothesis. Therefore, Natural Science proceeds by utilizing the scientific method to produce a mathematical model to further examine the reality of such entity. In spite of this, the predictions of the pre-dark matter models did not match reality, which means that the mathematical model was incorrect. Therefore, there was a need to develop a new model. Consequently, Dark Matter theory emerged wherein it provided accurate predictions in several unrelated areas e.g. cluster dynamics and galaxy rotation rates. However, reason has its limitations in developing firm understanding on the knowledge spheres of Natural Sciences. An example of such is the competitive rivalry between Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison. The feud between the two intelligent men engaged in a “War of Currents” during the 1880s over whose invention would impact the world. Tesla had the ability to visualize and recall intricate images which lead to the creation of prototypes of every invention. Moreover, he used reasoning to further enhance his knowledge and discovery of the light bulb. However, Edison was more of the protege since he was taught under the mastery of Tesla. The battle between the two demonstrates how the use of reason in acquiring robust knowledge in the field of Natural Science could create a dispute among researchers. Thus, creating firm knowledge does require both consensus and disagreement for the given hypothesis.History In a historical perspective, robust knowledge is developed with the use of memory and shared knowledge to gather and form coherent ideas. Memory enables historians to recollect and uncover certain concepts of the past however, it could also be unreliable in terms of retrieving valid facts. The methodology in which historians develop a united understanding of the past is difficult with the influence of memory. Thus, brings about the question the extent to which the influence of memory would hinder historians in their pursuit in knowledge. An article from OpenLearn examines why historians tend to disagree about past events. The author, John Shaw, indicated that factors such as “ideology and political predisposition” could affect one’s understanding based on their memory (OpenLearn, 2005). However, memory can help uncover the past by gathering witnesseses of such events. An example of this would be the issue of Comfort Women in South Korea. The Comfort Women system was created under the Japanese rule during the 1910s wherein women from Korea were chosen alongside China, Philippines and other Asian countries to serve as sex slaves for Japanese military troops (Los Angeles Times, 2017). Witnesses and victims of such horrendous act were interviewed to further develop a robust understanding of the occurred events during World War II. Not only did historians benefit from this, but the government of Japan and South Korea agreed to come to a consensus. South Korea agreed to refrain from criticizing the Japanese for their acts while Japan agreed to fund 1 billion yen towards the South Korean survivors (Los Angeles Times, 2017). However, the influence of memory in the pursuit in historical knowledge can be unreliable in terms of gathering evidence without providing the validity of such source. An example of such is the debate over the economic growth in England during the industrial growth (OpenLearn, 2005). During the 1970s, the evidence procured by Phelps-Brown and Hopkins, showed that there was a dramatic growth of England’s economy. However, a new research method was discovered and therefore the data obtained was revised by Deane and Cole. Furthermore, it shows a downward trend for the economy with the use of Gross Domestic Product. Consequently, the revision was challenged by historians, Berg and Hudson, due to their speculation on the data obtained. Thus, gathering historical data is not simply based on the discovery of new research that surpasses the validity of evidences based on old research. Overall, memory influences historians to come with several disagreements in order to form robust knowledge on past events. Conclusion Examining questions in Natural Sciences and History proves that creating firm knowledge requires agreement and disagreement from researchers. Thus, the pursuit of knowledge can be deemed unbiased and logical to a great extent. In Natural sciences, the influence of reason is beneficial with the use of scientific method. Scientists can create a firm understanding based on the hypothesis gathered. In terms of history, memory hinders historians to come to terms with the facts provided.