Is knowledge only based on observation(perception)?

Question

If so, perception can be flawed (look at optical illusions) so, does that mean our knowledge is flawed?

Answer 1

knowledge is obtained first from observation... if you can observe and learn, then it is reasonable to assume there also is intuitive knowlege gained through your perception of any subject matter.... (which by my defination is realitively the same) the diference is when you obtain "perceptive knowledge" you are buliding on previously obtained knowledge (you are just gaining a further depthness to your knowldge... a wider perspective if you will).

Answer 2

Knowledge can be based on only 2 of the following

1. Individual, group's or majority or almost all people's perceptions
(Machine perceptions become human knowledge only when a human perceives it or makes use of inferences)
2. Individual or collective inferences based and derived from starting from 1 and then 1 and OR or 2 (Including any mechanical or machine inferences)

That's the nature and limitation of knowledge and whether flawed or not we have to live with this limitation of knowledge.

Answer 3

Perception is the external input for knowledge - more accurately can be termed as information. Information is converted into knowledge through the process of logic which involves comparing various information for similarities as well as dissimilarities and often a deduction or induction. There is no knowledge without any information. All information is received through perception.

Hence we can indeed say that perception is the sole source of our knowledge. Even whatever knowledge comes through the genes is first acquired and stored in the genes through the above mentioned process of input information converted to knowledge through logic.

If perception input is flawed, in the process of conversion into knowledge, it would be seen as dissimilar to previous knowledge and rejected for the time being. However, if the flawed input keeps on coming repeatedly, it would then be accepted as another set of knowledge parallel to the earlier set which was dissimilar. Hence, stray flawed perception would not result in flawed knowledge - even repeatedly dissimilar perception would result in both the right and the flawed knowledge to exist in our system for further verification. If all these processes are crossed and the flawed input continues, yes, then that would become flawed knowledge too.

Answer 4

Perception is at different levels depending upon to what extent an individual has evolved. And so knowledge too would be flawed to that extent.
It is not advisable to pre-conclude the 'perception' to be restricted to just observation... perception can go beyond sensory level, and that is what spirituality is all about !

Answer 5

It depends what type of knowledge. Data, no, its observation and it an be varified by other's perceptions and observations as well...

True knowledge is that by which you can reach no matter who you are, just by comparing set variables by which have been agreed by everybody...

Perception, is that which is based on variables which are not known by qualatative or quantitative means, because its impossible to quantify at our stage of technology...such as emotions, qualitative tastes, etc...which have to do with the values and emotional hardwiring set forth to us by random variables at birth...and then our epi-genes and genetics at conception.

Its this degree of randomness, that makes some perceptions equally valid under certain conditions...

However, one day, we can have a computer that rates arguements based on probability relative to certain situations and determine the best course of action. Things will then be more quantative and less based on perceptions. It will be generally known that say, the arguement of the beleif in God for reasons of the bible is logically flawed...just by probabilities and the rules of logic, etc, etc...which can be implemented in a compuer...Furthermore, the lower brain's neural precepts can be modeled and people's decisions modeled based on that, which can indicate taste's, personality, and moods, and assign a probability of someone doing certain actions...

Through this, we can attain true knowledge...

What happens, is that we don't have a full picture of what is going on, there aer many random variables that are hard to keep track of...Therefore certain assumptions are made that only apply to specific situations, and therefore, when combined at the complex level, our knowledge in other specific situations becomes flawed, because our original model did not account for some or many possibilities. Therefore, it is our inaccuracy and incapacity of knowing certain varaibles in social, scientific, and eocnomic settings, that do not allow us to have all information, but rather have asymetric information, and therefore only our perceptions to 'speculate' what might be happening...so we go on our intuition..

Those that have good intuitive sense succeed...Thsoe that don't, do not. And knowledge is found most commenly in those that can draw appropriate conclusions from things, instead of 'off the ball' opinions on set data or observations, that although possible, are highly unlikely...

Also education is another factor...since people on Earth are mostly uneducated...this leaves a lot of them without the right analytic tools to assess situations correctly and many things up in the air to speculation...and therefore they do ot erach the 'correct' conclusion...and therefore attain flawed 'knowledge'

so really, knowledge can be mroe correct, the more ifnormation you know, and the more analytically or educated someone is, to be able to asses data, and come to the right conclusions...

so there is knowlege, and then there is flawed knowledge based on perceptions that were wrong because of ignorance, stupidity, or lack of education...

A perfect analysis of things would allow for the correct dissection of knowledge, which at this current stage in our evolution, we do not have.

Answer 6

I would hate to no that I had to see to believe...No because an optical illusions is something you Imagine...if you educate yourself to the fact that some things are optical illusion...why because the state of mind will sometimes let you see things you want to see...The worst one is a sexual illusion ....it will get you into the worst trouble....But when you can see these illusion and not give into them them you got it beat....Watch the devils advocate with Alpacino....And you will see what I mean ....Some can see these Illusion....And some are drown into them destroying their whole being......Thank God for the ones of us that can see......So no that dose not mean our knowledge is flawed it means you we or who ever cant see this knowledge....is flawed...God bless us all....

Answer 7

I do not think knowledge is only based on observation. Knowledge is something that I believe exists conceptually, it is not a thing that can be touched, tasted or seen. The "knowledge" in my head does not necessarily come from sense experience. Because our knowledge is not concrete, then knowledge must not be able to only consist of concrete things.

Answer 8

Knowledge isn't knowledge if it is based on flawed perception.

Answer 9

ofcourse. you have to take in information to obtain knowledge and the task of taking in information can be skewed giving us bad knowledge this is why there are always more than one side of a story or more than one belief. If knowledge was not flawed everybody would agree on everything.

"knowledge isnt knowledge if its based on flawed perception?"
thats my point what is true knowlege, to obtain it you have to incounter information and translate it. all acts of obtaining information are flawed therefore all knowlege is percieved giving no absolute. where do you get those things in your head they dont just appear. think before you answer.

Answer 10

Knowledge is often based on experience. We put our hand on a hot surface it is burned, it is painful. We know not to put our hand on a hot surface again. We have gained the knowledge of the effect of heat on flesh.