2007-03-30 08:09:11 · 18 answers · asked by JT 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Yup!
Good luck!
2007-03-30 08:17:49 · answer #1 · answered by Alex 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Using science is a way to determine some forms of knowledge, but isn't able to uncover other forms.
For example, if you want to know why Shakespeare wrote Hamlet, you would do historical research, not scientific research. If you are on a trial for a crime, you might be presented with some scientific knowledge, but you might also be provided testimonies that give you far more knowledge about making the right decision.
Scientific knowledge might be the best source of knowledge for things that are reproducible, but there are a lot of things that aren’t reproducible that you can still gather a great deal of knowledge about through non-scientific means that are still just as valid.
2007-03-31 02:17:22 · answer #2 · answered by Michael M 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The question is the nature and means of human knowledge which is a branch of philosophy: epistemology
This forms the basis for all conscious intellectual inquiry of which scientific inquiry i.e. physics,biology,psychology are areas of specific knowledge
"Other kinds of knowledge" insinuates that there are sources of knowledge other than sense perception, reason and logic and the conceptual faculty distinctive of human beings such as intuition, subjective "experience", or revelation
In this sense the true is the better
2007-03-30 15:35:03 · answer #3 · answered by Micheal A 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some people accept scientific knowledge as superior since when a theory is formulated it can be tested. That is the nature of science. However, if you were to look at a philosophical argument, the answer may then be that knowledge comes from life (allbeit in different ways depending upon which strain of philosophy you are interested in).
2007-03-30 15:17:38 · answer #4 · answered by dawn h 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO--for a person to be knowledgeable he must be very well rounded and have knowledge of all subjects. Especially current affairs, eloquent English, excellent writing skills, etc.
A person can be very intelligent, but needs to be able to discuss everything, somewhat. The main thing is believing in God, The head of the Universe, which some scientist try to prove the opposite. They never have.
2007-03-30 15:17:41 · answer #5 · answered by Dianna D 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
Intelligence is one thing, but if you don't have the knowledge of wisdom you are doomed.
Wisdom with no valued intelligence i.e. college education, high school diploma: is far better than just scientific knowledge.
Quite frankly I would prefer the company of an uneducated man with wisdom, than that of an intelligent man/woman who has no wisdom.
2007-03-30 18:27:40 · answer #6 · answered by the old dog 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You couldn't have scientific knowledge unless you knew math to measure and you had the ability to read and reason.
2007-03-30 15:15:05 · answer #7 · answered by redunicorn 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Knowledge is knowledge. There is no best or better.
2007-03-30 18:16:18 · answer #8 · answered by Sophist 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't think so. . . When my grandmother was young, she was taught in school that the atom is the smallest form of matter that cannot be divided. On the other hand, she knew how to raise 9 children who all turned out well.
2007-03-30 15:18:45 · answer #9 · answered by arlene k 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Knowledge of self is key to all secrets.
2007-03-30 15:19:11 · answer #10 · answered by cementshroom13 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Spiritual knowledge is best.
2007-03-30 18:55:57 · answer #11 · answered by intellectualamarflame 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋