English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

6 answers

Yes - Pre intellectual awareness tell us so. place your hand on hot stove you will move it not because of the fact that you read somewhere that stoves are hot nor because you had previous experience with hot stoves and think "oh it's a scalding hot stove better move my hand then"

even a baby that cannot speak and has never seen fire will remove its hand immediately from that fire if it inquisitve enough to stick it in .

there is an innate knowledge provided us by our biological nature.

2007-12-03 22:14:28 · answer #1 · answered by . 6 · 0 0

One possible answer might be pure consciousness, what I mean by that is if you were conscious but had no senses from which to draw experience, and no prior experience that drew from the senses, (being born as a disembodied brain if you will), if you still "feel" existence then perhaps that could mean yes, especially if you some how intuitively came to believe that something more existed out side of your own "pure consciousness" I think that would mean the answer is definitely yes.
Or maybe you would just lump it into one of the two categories listed above but in doing so you would have to concede that it would not be the traditional sense of the words experience or reason. At the very least the example described above would probably offer some interesting insights if we were able to study such a case.

2007-12-03 01:29:29 · answer #2 · answered by mtheoryrules 7 · 0 0

No. Those 4 "other" sources listed as Indian philosophy require the "experience" of listening (etc), and the act of reason on what has heard.
Knowledge is epistemological certainty that what the 5 senses or what thinking has perceived, matches all else that one knows, or at least does not contradict all else that one knows, begining with empirical existence.
Such things as "transcendental" knowledge, knowledge from dreams, etc, come from the sub-conscious. There is no "noumenal" entity "somewhere out there outside of one's self" that can transmit knowledge directly into the mind.
You can experience with the senses and have a perception of the sense, from which you learn; or you can take old perceptions and use reason to determine knowledge you didn't previously have.

2007-12-03 00:21:28 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Indian Philosophy (or Indian logic) suggests four more sources of knowledge. They are: verbal testimony (depending on the authority of a text or a person), postulation (that is, postulating something not seen or perceived on the basis of what is perceived), non-cognition (that is, knowing something from its non-apprehension) and comparison (obtaining knowledge of what is perceived through its similarities with what we already know). However, almost all schools (except one - Carvaka) accept perception and reasoning alone. Only two schools - Vedanta and one branch of Mimamsa - accept all sources of knowledge.

2007-12-02 23:43:48 · answer #4 · answered by Chandrasekar V 1 · 0 0

Your own self is the source of all knowledge. For example if somebody tell yo0u it is very cold, if you do not know what is cold like, you will not follow hi.

This is a simple example but for complex things, you know them that is why when they are brought before you , you understand them. You can not understand a thing which you do not know. So your own spiritual source is the source of all knowledge.

2007-12-02 23:01:16 · answer #5 · answered by ashok 4 · 0 0

The Bible, though both flawless and false has all the answers to our existence from all views. Question not it's logic, question not the real truth, the only thing that matters are our actions. Choose wisely, we only get one life, and it would be a shame if you spent the rest of your life imprisoned it what I call hell on Earth.

2007-12-03 01:08:02 · answer #6 · answered by Adversity 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers