There are three main sorts of knowing: knowing as, knowing that, knowing how.
Knowing *as* is perception - knowing a bunch of sensations as, say, a pineapple. Do we perceive the pineapple as it 'really' is? No, we only perceive it as we are - with a human's-eye-view.
Knowing *that*, or propositional knowledge, is belief that is true and justified (or perhaps 'caused'). Can we know 'the truth'? Only on our own terms - only as a coherent body of truths that are non-fictional.
Knowing *how*, practical knowledge, is knowledge of causes and effects. There are two sorts: skills that our 'body' learns by repeated experience of causing effects, and technology, which is in partnership with science. Can we have perfect practical knowledge? Well, technology works for everyone - it works for Osama Bin Laden just as well as it works for George W. Bush, and, to that extent, it is 'objective' knowledge. But the problem with our practical knowledge is cause and effect isn't a sequence, it's a web. Everything we do has both wanted and unwanted consequences, and we are only just beginning to learn how to predict in sequence; we have very little idea how to predict in web (so to speak).
2006-06-25 15:56:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by brucebirdfield 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
Is knowledge possible? Strictly speaking, we can only have knowledge of what we directly experience. For example, right now I am seeing this computer. I do not Know that I am seeing a "real" computer, but I do know that I am perceiving what I intend to be a computer. I may be mistaken about the sources of my perceptions, but it is not possible that I am not experiencing those perceptions. Using a strict definition of knowledge, these are things which i Know, and I know them because I experience them directly.
Beyond that it is difficult to say that I do in fact Know anything.
I think you asked a good question, in asking how, if we cannot know, that we know that we cannot know. I would say that I only Know what I experience directly because I am certain of it. I can't Know something and be unsure about it. There is no possibility that I am mistaken about experiencing my experiences, but there is a possiblity that I am mistaken about the sources of my experiences, and so I do not in fact Know them. And I don't Know them, because I can be uncertain about them. But I can Know that I am uncertain about them because the uncertainty is a direct experience, which I can know I have.
To sum up, I only Know something if I experience it directly, otherwise I can be uncertain about its "reality". And this uncertainty undermines claims to knowledge about things not directly experienced without undermining itself because it is directly experienced.
Really good question.
2006-06-25 14:25:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by student_of_life 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Knowledge is possible because we have a lot of people who eat apples. Is it worth all the pressure just to eat the forbidden fruit. Im talking about desire and curiosity that makes knowledge possible.
2006-06-25 13:39:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Knowledge is simply memory.
The only way you can know something, is to remember it.
Where the memory comes from is the question. It can be from
learning. It can be from your own internal thoughts and dreams. It can be genetic, hard-coded into our DNA.
So, yes, knowledge is possible.
2006-06-26 04:18:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by jeffrey_meyer2000 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Learning is possible. Knowledge is the assimilation of learning, and wisdom is the application of the knowledge.
2006-06-25 11:32:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by aboukir200 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
your asking a question arent you? without knowledge you wouldnt know to ask
2006-06-25 11:37:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by . 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
We learn before we are born; we swim and feel in the womb. When you stop learning, you stop growing; when you stop growing, you die.
2006-06-25 11:31:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by cmpbush 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
of course it is possible that is if you know how to use your head.
2006-06-25 14:44:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋