The word “know” is an outstandingly elastic term where it covers all kinds of knowledges that sometimes seem unrelated. In order to discuss whether or not a knowledge can be created with a single way of knowing, it is paramount to distinguish when a certain piece of information is deemed to be knowledge. For instance, is it the shared knowledge, or the personal knowledge that is in question? If anything gained by the ways of knowing need to be accepted by the public to be considered knowledge, it has to go through the zone of exchange, where the exchange between personal and shared knowledge takes place, sparking questions and exploration. It is this process which sparks the questions and debate between individual minds, forcing the employment of numerous ways of knowing, most often language. Therefore, for the sake of this argument, the focus will be on whether it is possible to gain personal knowledge through an isolated way of knowing. Before one can conclude that one way of knowing is not suffice to create knowledge, it is important to identify any hierarchy among the different ways of knowing. Are there any ways of knowing that superior to others? Are there some that are subsumed by the other? Most often, the attempts to answer such questions fail to reach a satisfactory conclusion, due to the sheer entangled nature of these ways of knowing. However, one way of knowing stand out above all, which is language. This ultimately boils down to whether our ability to perceive thought is dependant on the extent of language we have access to, in reference of that particular phenomenon. Otherwise known as the Sapir Whorf theory, this theory states, “an individual’s thoughts and actions are determined by the language or languages that individual speaks”. As Edward Sapir claims, ” It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection”. If this hypothesis does truly hold true, it can be concluded that no knowledge can be created with a single way of knowing. However, this hypothesis is often greatly debated for numerous logical downfalls it has. For example, if this hypothesis were to be true, literary works would nearly be impossible to translate if each language had its own distinct way of thought encoded into it. As such, it is evident that language is merely one of many factors that influence one’s cognition.