Re: dhw--Epistemological Framework (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Tuesday, January 18, 2011, 01:16 (4866 days ago) @ dhw

dhw, 
> If we know nothing, why did you enumerate what you consider to be knowledge? This list was the basis of the discussion you said you had been "wanting to have with everyone on this forum". Now you tell us there is no knowledge, in which case what is it you wanted to discuss? 
> -We all start from knowing nothing. But I also missed something else I needed to add: Truth. Frankly, while I've mentioned that there are a "precious few truths" a few times, I'm beginning to backpedal on that too. But I'll keep that for now. We can never be certain we've reached "the truth" on any endeavor. I think that sentence speaks for itself...-We experience the world, we try things, we add it to our "knowledge" pool. -Knowledge exists, but knowledge is not final--truth is final, and knowledge seeks the truth. But as I said earlier today, the truth is a moving target. -> In my response to your list, I wrote in bold:
> "It could be argued that there is no such thing as knowledge, in which case the discussion ends here." 
> 
> However, I also offered an alternative to universal scepticism: "Or we can adopt a commonsense approach and agree that certain things can be known ... but then we must agree on a criterion." I proposed one through the following (tentative) definition: "knowledge is possession of information that is accepted as being true by all those who are aware of it." I applied this definition to your categories of knowledge, and found that it fitted your "transferable" variety, as well as the technological examples I had given earlier. In my comments on your list, I also questioned your concept of validity, and attempted to draw the vital distinction between knowledge and belief.
> 
> If you genuinely want to discuss the "epistemological framework", please decide what level you want to argue on, but I really don't see the point of inviting us to consider your personal definitions of knowledge and then telling us knowledge doesn't exist. I have the breathalyzer at the ready!-Knowledge does not equal truth. Knowledge is what we think --indeed hope--is the truth; my model of skepticism begins with stating "The only thing we can know for certain is that we don't know anything." Does knowledge have to be true to be knowledge? Newtonian physics demonstrates the opposite: the knowledge of physical interactions we've approximated is still extremely useful, even though it is the wrong description for gravity. -Knowledge vs. belief. In having this discussion, it should be apparent that I view belief as a kind of faith. I prefer to use words like "trust." (Trust must be earned...)-I trust that our knowledge of Newtonian physics is accurate. My own study of physics demonstrated that we can feel "safe" that we have a good idea on what's going on--but quantum physics demonstrated that what we'd learned through Newtonian physics was in contradiction to deeper principles of nature...-So therefore, it is folly to me to claim our knowledge has achieved the status of truth. There's a difference between being "reasonably sure" or "trusting" our findings, and concluding that "we know this" and calling it done. -Maybe you would accept that I would say our quest for knowledge on any topic can never be concluded because we don't know (and cannot know) what the truth is?-As for my position on "belief" I stay away from "belief" as much as possible. Belief is a word that to me connotes "something I take for granted." I hate it whenever I see it. Other connotations for belief for me are "I'm too lazy to research it so I believe it." Dictionary.com lists several definitions for belief, the only definition I'll allow myself to use the word for is in conveying an opinion. Belief also connotes "I'm not sure but I think it's..." as in the usage "I believe that the proper answer is..." it gives the user wiggle room to back out and save face. -http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Belief

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"