This prompt promotes the idea that knowledge is objective and not subjective to an extent. In my opinion, objective knowledge is basically things that have a greater degree of tangibility and are unbiased, for example mathematics. However, subjective knowledge is one’s impressions and opinions (i.e. those shoes are the best – not a fact because other people may like it). To start off, the term knowledge must be defined. It is defined as a justified true belief. Another term that must be defined and evaluated is the systematic organization of facts. A Fact is a numerical piece of information that is tangible and subjective. It involves one’s opinion by basing it on personal experience. The first knowledge issue that will be evaluated throughout this essay is; to what extent can one use only logic and reason to evaluate a knowledge claim? The second knowledge issue is; how does emotion as a way of knowing hinder of help our ability to search for or evaluate knowledge? I will be evaluating these knowledge issues through the use of two areas of knowledge, mathematics and human sciences.
We must discuss the two types of knowledge; objective and subjective knowledge. Objective knowledge is what happens in nature without the mind. However, this is not considered knowledge quite yet. This is just existence, and the small things that make up the event are just existing. When there is finally a mind that has a language, we have the ability to have knowledge. The mind can use whatever means necessary to explain this event, but they cannot fully explain it without words. Lets take this example, a caveman, who lacks any sort of language, but can create cave paintings. He comes across the edge of the hill and he sees the sunset. He stands and ...
... middle of paper ...
...er, promoting one’s interests in knowledge, it would lead to certain biased views/ perceptions, which ultimately would hinder some of the knowledge that exists. For example, in psychology, some researchers tend to repeat the same experiment over again in order to obtain certain results as hypothesized. This is a result of researcher/ experimenter bias. This allows the researcher to ignore all other factors and results that may have an effect, once the desired results are obtained. Therefore, emotions are capable of both, hindering and helping us to understand knowledge.
In conclusion, knowledge is more than the systematic organization of facts. Whilst some knowledge is formed on the basis of the organization of objective facts, such as personal experience, sense perception, logic and reason, we humans use all ways of knowing to make sense of the world around us.
How we approach the question of knowledge is pivotal. If the definition of knowledge is a necessary truth, then we should aim for a real definition for theoretical and practical knowledge. Methodology examines the purpose for the definition and how we arrived to it. The reader is now aware of the various ways to dissect what knowledge is. This entails the possibility of knowledge being a set of truths; from which it follows that one cannot possibly give a single definition. The definition given must therefore satisfy certain desiderata , while being strong enough to demonstrate clarity without losing the reader. If we base our definition on every counter-example that disproves our original definition then it becomes ad hoc. This is the case for our current defini...
This paper will be covering what knowledge essentially is, the opinions and theories of J.L. Austin, Descartes, and Stroud, and how each compare to one another. Figuring out what knowledge is and how to assess it has been a discussion philosophers have been scratching their heads about for as long as philosophy has been around. These three philosophers try and describe and persuade others to look at knowledge in a different light; that light might be how a statement claiming knowledge is phrased, whether we know anything at all for we may be dreaming, or maybe you’re just a brain in a vat and don’t know anything about what you perceive the external world to be.
In every field of study that exists, experts research, test, and reach conclusions; later they often debate, their ideas clashing to see which holds the most merit and which is the best to continue researching. This is the basis of our understandings, turning the personal knowledge of experts into shared knowledge that can be used to better the lives of everyone, and this comes from the disagreements in our Areas of Knowledge (AoKs). Before we delve further, we need to define some terms. Facts are understood as something that is the case, or as information that makes a sentence true. Experts are understood to be people that possess a significant amount of knowledge in an area at a greater level than the general public, and discipline is understood
Knowledge according to Merriam- Webster’s dictionary is “acts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education.” Rene Descartes saw knowledge being attained through deductive logic and would disagree with this definition. Charles Peirce’s pragmatic approach on the other hand is the reason we have that definition.
Knowledge, that certain indescribable thing that everyone thinks they have a little bit of, is an elusive concept that nearly every philosopher from ancient Greece to the modern day has given at least a nod to. How, after all, can we know that we are right in something if we don't know what knowing is? This question, and the sometimes futile attempt to answer it, is called epistemology. More specifically, it is the study of how we know and what that knowledge actually is. Is knowledge objective, subjective, something else, or even possible?
Knowledge is defined as information and skills one acquires through experience or education. There is; however, a certain knowledge than cannot be certain and is unjustifiable from the scientific perspective. Karen Armstrong, Robert Thurman, and Azar Nafisi wrote about this type of knowledge in their essays: “Homo Religiosus,” “Wisdom,” and “Reading Lolita in Tehran,” respectively. Each of these authors has a different view of what knowledge is exactly, how it can be achieved, and what it means to have achieved it, but each author takes on the view that the concept of knowledge should be viewed from a social stance. Armstrong refers to this uncertain knowledge as “myth,” Thurman refers to it as “wisdom,” and Nafisi refers to it as “upsilamba";
To sum up, in our community of learners the knowledge that we have today consists of facts that are universally acknowledged and considered to be truth. The word fact that from Latin means something that is doe, when organized systematically forms knowledge, however it changes over time. Difference between facts can be seen in different areas of knowledge for example in history and natural sciences, where language and reasoning are used as tools of attaining knowledge. While language can be used as a manipulator of knowledge by taking advantage of it being the main source of attaining knowledge, reasoning is a logical justification of facts. Both of them can be changed as for in case of language another powerful authority may capture the power and in case of reasoning new type of facts or statements can be present that will lead to shifting the knowledge.
Knowledge does not openly mean to know. However knowledge is facts, information, and skills seized by a person through either experience or education through the practical understanding of the subject or in another words a justified true belief. There are four ways of knowledge consisting of language, perception, reason, and emotion. Knowing is someone told me whereas you seeing it is perception. Reason comes from you working it out to whereas emotion is it just seems obvious. This connects to passing an exam by cramming the night before and feeling like you didn’t understand anything as knowledge is greater than information. Knowledge stays in your brain as you know yourself why, how, when, and why your answer is conclusive. It connects fragments of information in order to construct a whole some idea. For instance knowledge unlike information isn’t forgotten or memorized instead is more than loads of facts and info...
Knowledge is information, facts and skills that you acquire through people, past experiences and education. It is a kind of belief which works as a factor so that you don't know whether or not things are false. Something is knowledge only if it’s believed, it is true and it can be justified.
Donald Davidson identifies three forms of knowledge which he believes to be irreducible and interdependent: knowledge of self, which is immediately known; knowledge of the outside world, which is simply caused by the events and objects around you, and thus depends on sense organs to be semi-immediately known, yet open to uncertainty; and knowledge of the minds of others, which is never immediately known. The standard approach to philosophy tries to reduce one of these forms of knowledge to one or two of the others, often leading to unanswerable questions. Davidson argues that all three varieties of knowledge are interdependent—that is, you cannot have any one without the other two. In this paper, I will primarily review Davidson’s argument of the interdependence of the three varieties of knowledge. I will then briefly discuss the plausibility of Davidson’s account and question if it truly can explain how we come to understand others’ feelings and emotions.
What is knowledge? According to the scientific method, knowledge ought to be empirical in nature, measurable, and repeatable via experimentation. Another common definition is that “Knowledge represents our best understanding at any given time.” Looking at this well-known claim, by an anonymous author, we can approach it from a language perspective and focus on the part that states “at any given time.” This definition implies that knowledge is constrained by time. However, relating back to the notion that humans are flawed, we typically claim things as knowledge that shouldn’t be considered as such. A good example of this would be the notion of God. For some people, God exists. But if we were to base this piece of “knowledge” on the scientific method, this is not considered knowledge. We cannot complete an experiment that can be repeated with the same result...
...nly one person instead. Using reason, the person could come to the conclusion that one death is better than five, but emotion also plays a role in this decision. Having to interact in the situation can change the decision, and the person’s view on the situation. When searching for knowledge, emotions make it so humans have the energy ti take part in intellectual activities. Along with that, emotions give people the potential to discover new ideas. Those with passion in their work, are more motivated, and able to gain more knowledge because of this. Emotions can be a source of knowledge for some things that reason cannot prove. Reason can only take people so far, until emotion is needed, such as making a decision between two rational options. All in all, there are arguments that show emotions are trustable in the pursuit of knowledge, and can be a source of knowledge.
Emotions are at most times elusive. Yet, it is the earliest applied and used way of acquiring knowledge. An example will be, a baby's first cry at birth. Emotions shape the way we think and behave thus influencing our interpretation of the world around us, and how we respond to circumstances in it. It also affects how we interpret perceptions and language, selective memory and how we apply our reasoning. “Philosophers in particular, tend to agree now that there is a connection between the way one's emotion is to be described and the nature of the beliefs or the knowledge on which it is based." (Gordon, Robert M. 408) Emotions can be regarded as either an obstacle to our knowledge or a source of knowledge. In this essay, I will assess the strengths and weaknesses of emotions in two areas of knowledge, namely, religious knowledge and scientific knowledge.
We can define knowledge as a justified, true belief that can be shared by means of language.
Knowledge allows you to prove your facts. It’s the awareness one has about things. Imaginations, at times, can be uncertain. Knowledge leads us to imagination. We can imagine, only if we know. Knowledge is through your hard work and experience. One should not compare two different poles together.