As I understand it, “disinterestedness” refers to objectivity and the pursuit of value-free knowledge. When we are selfless, we detach ourselves from prejudices and become more neutral and open-minded, which helps to obtain more reliable knowledge. “Knowledge seeking” in this statement means acquisition and production of knowledge. Knowledge itself can be best described in Plato's words as justified true belief, which could be either theoretical or practical. Practical knowledge is acquired through everyday practical experiences such as riding a bicycle, while theoretical knowledge is the knowledge of why something is true and requires explanation. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay “Disinterestedness” is connected to every aspect of a true and justified belief. Impartiality in the truth means being purely interested in the truth itself and refraining from drawing hasty conclusions on any basis. Reliable knowledge can be gained in establishing beliefs by objectively accepting a statement as true when going beyond empirical data. Considering neutrality in justification, the right position of a person's beliefs with respect to knowledge should be determined in such a way that it is not influenced by external factors. However, disinterest implies not only detachment from political and social influences, but also a lack of emotions, such as curiosity, passion and enthusiasm. Being completely disinterested can hinder a person's ability to ask questions, observe, and actively engage in inquiry when pursuing knowledge. This makes it extremely difficult to remain neutral and ignore the underlying assumptions and implications. To examine the cited statement, we must ask the question whether and how value neutrality is desirable and attainable. I will explore the link between epistemic and contextual values ​​for the acquisition and creation of knowledge in the natural sciences and art. We are creatures who encounter events from one perspective. An individual's perspective is always influenced by his or her personal situation, language, culture, and physical conditions in which the knowledge claim is made. In my opinion, abstention from biased behavior would ideally provide knowledge in its most accurate form, however this is unachievable. Complete detachment would mean avoiding some desirable values ​​such as perseverance and simplicity. Therefore the degree of value neutrality must have a reasonable limit. Value neutrality in science refers to not influencing claims, methods, and results with particular perspectives, value commitments, community biases, or personal interests. The acquisition of knowledge should depend exclusively on logical reasoning and empirical data, as logical empiricism states. Epistemic values ​​are those that connect to cognitive successes such as justified beliefs and understanding. They include predictive accuracy, scope, unification, explanatory power, simplicity, and consistency with other accepted theories. Contextual values, on the other hand, are moral, personal, social, political and cultural values. Objectivity, achieved through detachment from both, characterizes science as an AOK; we can go so far as to say that it faithfully describes the facts in the absence of normative commitments and personal prejudices. Science aims to employ value neutrality strong enough to produce valuable knowledge and yet weak enough tomake it reachable. To pursue knowledge, scientists must explore events detached from personal perspective and arrive at a statement that remains constant. This concept of describing world phenomena regardless of perspectives through the engagement of epistemic values ​​is desirable as it provides a simpler and more unified representation of the world, aids in the resolution of disagreements, and enables the proposition of valuable predictions. Scientists can explain the world and our image of it through theories. The universal law of gravitation, first proposed by Sir Isaac Newton, is a perfect example, as it is based on numerous observations that logically explain the force of attraction exerted on any two objects. The theory is formulated with epistemic values ​​as it is simplistic, coherent and supported by reliable evidence which led to the formula F = G × [(m1m2)/(r)^2]. It directly demonstrates the relationship between the force exerted and the mass and distance between the two bodies, making precise predictions possible. The theory is consistent and has scope as it accords with other currently accepted relevant theories and its consequences extend beyond the data it is required to explain. However, our ability to show facts, while highly desirable, depends on whether the claims we make can be unambiguously established empirically. The use of scientific methods such as observations, measurements, and experiments to collect data and obtain sufficient evidence to support stated scientific claims are essential to gaining knowledge and are based on epistemic values. This leads us to claim that epistemic values ​​are desirable for obtaining true and justified beliefs. Thomas Kuhn, a well-known philosopher of science, argues that epistemic values ​​define standards for the evaluation of theory, which characterize the scientific approach as a whole and demonstrate their advantage in the pursuit of scientific knowledge. The acquisition of value-free knowledge, relying entirely on evidence gathering, evaluation, and acceptance of scientific theories, may, however, be underdetermined by the evidence. This means that the available evidence is insufficient to identify what belief a person should have regarding that evidence. It usually leads to the formation of two or more competing theories. It is up to scientists to decide the degree of evidential justification needed to accept a theory as true. This decision-making process is subjective and highly dependent on individual morality, which demonstrates the use of contextual values ​​in the acceptance of scientific theory. To understand this, we can look at the example of biologist Nikolai Vavilov in the Soviet Union, who was sentenced to death because of his theories on genetic inheritance, which did not comply with Marxist-Leninist ideology. It was a time when scientific research and principles were controlled by political interests, which led to tragic epistemic effects throughout the 20th century. This contrasts with the prescribed statement as it presents the pursuit of knowledge as always dependent on other factors. Referring to another area of ​​knowledge, namely art, we gain knowledge in various forms from dance, literature, music and visual representations to name a few. The ways through which we pursue knowledge in art are highly dependent on emotions and intuition and are interpreted differently by individuals. Works of art bring people closer to understanding themselves, and while the art may be the same, how it is perceived by people depends on their perspective, which is a contextual value that cannot be.