How can we know anything?

Question

"Truth is said to consist in the agreement of knowledge with the object. According to this mere verbal definition, then, my knowledge, in order to be true, must agree with the object. Now, I can only compare the object with my knowledge by this means, namely, by taking knowledge of it. My knowledge, then, is to be verified by itself, which is far from being sufficient for truth. For as the object is external to me, and the knowledge is in me, I can only judge whether my knowledge of the object agrees with my knowledge of the object". Kant, Immanuel (1800), Introduction to Logic. Thomas Kingsmill Abbott (trans.),

Answer 1

I see it as there being "layers of knowledge"

-First-off, nobody can know anything with certainty, yes, including that I even exist since existence itself is so little understood. I also cannot know with certainty that nothing can be known: how nice!

-Secondly, there are, as you pointed out, many things that can be repeatedly verified through different people doing the same test and coming out with the same result with the caveats that such tests must be done either on Earth or observed on or near Earth, and in or around the current time. We do not know if things worked as they do in the far past, nor can we know how they will work in the distant future: even the "laws of physics" could be gradually changing. I call these knowings anthropocentric knowings, because they are common to experiments done by human beings.

Finally, there is the realm of personal experience that it is unreasonable (in my opinion) to deny outright. In fact, what I personally experience is as close to "truth" as I can possibly get. Now, these perceptions can and often do change as I learn more, so this is not a fixed truth. However, since I base my own choices off of whatever I take to be current truth, they have a strong impact on me.

I favor Feyerabend and Wittgenstein rather than Kant for discussing these issues of the limits to knowledge. Kant might have been one of the earlier people to begin these topic, but he did not explore them deeply in my opinion: much has been done more recently that is critical in my own view.

Answer 2

Yes... and it is said that that nothing can go faster than the Speed of Light.

However, the speed of light is just the fastest thing the human body can sense.

So is the existence of something just based on what is able to verified by human senses?

On that same point.

If the Universe is endless and human concepts of time and life have a start and finish then what was around BEFORE the beginning of the Universe and what was before that?

Even a vast vacuum is something so what is past the end of the Universe?

I feel helpless when I ask these questions... then I realize that I just don't matter in this Universe other than to myself and the things around me at this time and the only power I have it to take a step and the turn one way or the other and that will lead to a completely different future in my life. With that I just changed the entire future of the existence of the Universe. It may not matter, but I just changed it.

You just took the time to read this and that changed your life and the events afterwards.

And if you pick me to be the winner then I will read you response and the words and/or the time to read those words will have made you change to rest of my existence.

Thank You for the Question.

Answer 3

Not all answers are directly proportionate to every question. But first, the Anatomy of a question must be examined.

What is a "question?" This is weird because one is forced to use the very entity being examined to examine the question of what a question is. This is an indication that there is something lacking in man's logic or his communication systems or both or something else.

The answer is within the answer...never the question. For if we answer before we are even asked, the answer is already there; isn't it? The answer my friend is blowin' in the wind, the answer is blowin' in the wind.

Hope you got your answer because I am not answering any more questions in this context nor am I questioning you further.

Answer 4

kant... so did not miss him after my baccalaureat
anyway we know from our point of view what kant is saying is that we can't be allknowing and know every aspect of a knowledge kinda true but still a game of logic and retoric (play with words and there meaning not shure of the exact word) disturbing, mind puzzling but ultimately funny

Answer 5

truth is limited by our own finite ability to percieve it as such we are certainly restricted to our 5 senses and thier unique limitatations as well as by Goedel's theorem that says (in a nutshell) "any cnosistent axiomatic system has theoerems which cannot be assigned a truth value using only the given axioms" .

Answer 6

I agree with kant on such topics. He is really brilliant, his Metaphysics changed everything.

Answer 7

By reading books, asking questions.

Answer 8

I started a reply to this about three different times and finally said "Hell, I don't know" and gave up.

Answer 9

By living it.

Answer 10

you sound way to smart i have no clue what you are talking about and i have been in college for three years