does knowledge always require some kind of rational basis ?

Answer 1

Depends on how you define knowledge, and what you mean by "rational basis".
On everyday meaning I'd say no.

If the fact that you burned yourself gives you a knowledge of fire, is there any "rational basis" involved or not?
You could argue there is, but that would make a fairly primitive animal like a wasp, which learns to recognize features in its environment, a rational creature. (??)

A more human example: Does a human who knows the date of every battle in the 30 year war need a rational basis? All they need is a good memory.

Answer 2

No, a rational basis requires knowledge. Knowledge is facts, wisdom is understanding them.

Answer 3

Well I would think sometimes yes and sometimes no. Just because you have knowledge or something doesn't mean that you are going to act rationally. Knowledge and rational don't always go hand in hand.

Answer 4

no. i answered this in the question ' can knowledge exist independant of perception'. but it depends more specifically on your definition of rational and knowledge. if you define rational as:
a methodology of thought whose primary criterion be logic and subsequent criteria the use of induction or deduction to arrive at a certain conclusion; and knowledge as: the sum of an individuals mental cannon containing (and limited to) concepts and their mutual relationships as obtained by that individuals perception, then i would say definitely yes.

If however you were to redefine knowledge to include (in addition to the above definition) "...obtained by that individuals perception and intuition..." then i would say no.

Answer 5

no, you can want to know something simply just to know it. no reasoning required

Answer 6

"Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind" (A51/B75).