The Accuracy of Current Knowledge Human society functions primarily on the basis of common knowledge that most of us agree on. Most of the time, people trust the knowledge they currently possess without any doubt. However, sometimes the objective facts we believe in are reevaluated and redefined by the experience we gradually gain and by the discovery of new evidence from different perspectives. Therefore, the question arises: is all the knowledge we rely on today credible? In other words, will all the knowledge that we have all accepted today still be accepted in the near future or will it be rejected? A knowledge problem can thus be developed from the previous questions: to what extent can current knowledge in the fields of natural sciences and ethics be considered as perpetually acceptable knowledge? In this essay, I will focus on analyzing this question based on these two areas of knowledge, because the knowledge they present provides more objectivity. Natural science knowledge is considered one of the most consistent and objective among all knowledge in other areas. since the facts (what we consider facts from today's point of view) claimed by this region are extremely difficult to refute and heavily based on evidence. Most people undoubtedly trust the knowledge of this field and believe it to be the truth of the universe. As a science student, I completely trust the fundamental laws of physics, chemistry and all other natural science subjects because they seem very reasonable to me. Besides, I don't have enough knowledge to doubt it. However, I have already encountered the change in the knowledge we have learned as a fundamental truth. For example, in the middle of an article, it is considered perpetually acceptable knowledge in a closed society that people do not have variations of thoughts. So, in the current context, with the power of globalization, this knowledge would evolve over time and some of it would be rejected. In conclusion, knowledge in natural science and ethics can be considered perpetually acceptable knowledge under certain conditions, such as knowledge must remain consistent after enormous evaluations or in a closed society. Even if these two fields provide knowledge considered more objective, not all this knowledge can be perpetually acceptable, some have been proven to be false and therefore rejected by man. Therefore, following this model, knowledge that we believe to be true today can sometimes be rejected tomorrow. Next, to what extent humans rely on the knowledge they possess?