What is knowledge?

aishiteru

Aha I like this topic. I've been seaching for the answer of knowledge too. I think most of you guys did awesome jobs of defining knowledge in your own words.

What is knowledge?

At this point in my search, I would say that knowledge is TRUTH. The ultimate TRUTH  belongs to GOD.

I tend not to agree with your position. Because if I think that what we learn in school and college can be regarded as knowledge, many of them are merely theories. Thoeries are just assumptions which are made out of conducted experiments and studies.  There is no absolute truth to them.  For example, the theory of evolutuon by Charles Darwin, which you can learn in college.  Scientists are still continuing to look for evidence to support this claim but the thoery itself is already taught in colleges. I am not a supporter of Darwin's evolution but I still regard it as a kwowledge. It's fun to learn too. Just like philosophical and ethical theories. They are not completely wrong or right. And theories are frequenlty changed over time. So does syllabus in school and college. I am not saying your position is wrong. It's just a matter of one own's perspective. I think that way and you think the other way.

My definition of knowledge is useful information attained through experience and study that can be turned to the benefit of all mankind. Its not comprehensive.

I like this definition better. Though we might do not know if some of the information are true or not, but if we could apply them to our own benefit, they could be regarded as knowledge.

Feel free to post your own say about my opinion ;)

hamizao

Originally posted by ai****eru at 11-4-2006 12:36 PM

I tend not to agree with your position. Because if I think that what we learn in school and college can be regarded as knowledge, many of them are merely theories. Thoeries are just assumptions which are made out of conducted experiments and studies.  There is no absolute truth to them.  For example, the theory of evolutuon by Charles Darwin, which you can learn in college.  Scientists are still continuing to look for evidence to support this claim but the thoery itself is already taught in colleges. I am not a supporter of Darwin's evolution but I still regard it as a kwowledge. It's fun to learn too. Just like philosophical and ethical theories. They are not completely wrong or right. And theories are frequenlty changed over time. So does syllabus in school and college. I am not saying your position is wrong. It's just a matter of one own's perspective. I think that way and you think the other way.

You are most welcome to comment, ai****eru.

In my humble attempt at defining "knowledge", I am looking at it from the other direction. Putting it simply....whatever is "true" - then it is "knowledge", otherwise it is just a notion.  It is true that the general meaning of knowledge may be defined as any info that you know...but am trying to look at it in a more philosophical way without resorting to bygone great philosophers :hmm:

Cheerio.

foundation

Originally posted by hamizao at 11-4-2006 01:24 PM


You are most welcome to comment, ai****eru.

In my humble attempt at defining "knowledge", I am looking at it from the other direction. Putting it simply....whatever is "true&q ...

hope you are okay with my queries below - sincerely interested in the topic;

are you implying that something that is not confirmed true cannot be accepted as knowledge?  is it just the object of the knowledge or is it applicable at the meta-level as well - e.g. knowing of a lie?

secondly, how do you define truth as this is also subjective.  even if you define it as something from God as above, there are a lot of things that are not explicitly defined as from God - does it mean that it is not true?  is H20 equals to water?  Is my dream real?

aishiteru

Originally posted by foundation at 11-4-2006 02:40 PM


hope you are okay with my queries below - sincerely interested in the topic;

are you implying that something that is not confirmed true cannot be accepted as knowledge?  is it just the objec ...

I think the way he or she is saying it is like whatever TRUE is knowledge, otherwise, it is just a notion or assumption, not necessarily a kind of knowledge to him or her. BTW it is the best to leave to him or her to explain it further..

hamizao

By foundation:

are you implying that something that is not confirmed true cannot be accepted as knowledge?  

By ai****eru:

I think the way he or she is saying it is like whatever TRUE is knowledge, otherwise, it is just a notion or assumption, not necessarily a kind of knowledge to him or her.

That's my drift, ai****eru


By foundation:

secondly, how do you define truth as this is also subjective.  even if you define it as something from God as above, there are a lot of things that are not explicitly defined as from God - does it mean that it is not true?  is H20 equals to water?  Is my dream real?

My perception is, TRUTH may be  proven by man.

Let us take fire as an  example. Given the right conditions as per it's natural laws or  essence , it would burn.  However, whether it would actually or ultimately burn.......that eventuality is in God's hands.

I am a believer in God, the Creator and as such, the so-called natural laws or essence of  things are the way they are created . They would therefore continue to behave accordingly within the universe, henceforth allowing  the rational man the opportunity to make the right choices in life.  Unfortunately, man's ability is often hindered by  limitations  such that the ultimate TRUTH is often obscure.

I hope I have not confused anyone. Thank you both for your interest.

blackmore

...to me...knowledge is something yang aku bley comprehend...whether it benefits me or not doesnt matter..as long as i noe something new...it doesnt matter also whether it is real or just hearsay...yang penting pada aku ianya wujud kerana ada orang yang mempercayainya...cos the thing that matters most to me is that i dont inhibit my mind from accepting what is the truth and what is not....

aishiteru

what about legends and folk stories? are they knowledge as well?

blackmore

Originally posted by ai****eru at 17-4-2006 11:08 PM
what about legends and folk stories? are they knowledge as well?

...legends and folk stories...u learn something from them too dont u???....tho they may not be of any benefit or applicable to u...but u do noe something about those legendary heroes...villains...monsters...so...dont u think that the things that u got from all these legends and folk stories are considered as knowledge???

aishiteru

i think it's very difficult to decide whether or not they are knowledge

think about hikayat hang tuah for example. we do not know whether hang Tuah is real or the story is merely a creation of Tun Seri Lanang (if i'm making a mistake here, please correct me). okay let say hang tuah is very close between real or not that is very tough to be determined, then we may accept it as knowledge, becuase it is quite possible for him to actually exist. another example that I really like is dragon. the creature does not only appears in chinese legends but also in other culture such s malay, persian, and western. we cannot quite say wether dragon actually exist or not, but it can be very close to be between real or not. someone might say dragon might be dinasour. so we might accept dragon as knowledge too, though we are not sure if dragon is fact or fake. but what i want to point out is some of the folk stories, myths or legends can be so unreal to some extent, it's just very hard for us to believe. i dont know, maybe the story of Raja Sakti yang lahir dari buluh betung. do you believe a human could be born from buluh betung? I do not even know what type of buluh is buluh betung. it sounds so ridiculous hehe.

**edited for spelling msitkae

[ Last edited by  aishiteru at 18-4-2006 12:39 AM ]

hamizao

Mind if I join in?

To me, legends and folklores are notions or just beliefs that need to be  proven.

Let's take a police investigation. On TV we often hear them say "what do we know about the case so far". This suggests the knowledge of facts that have been proven in the course of the investigation.

In the case of Hang Tuah which appears in  Sejarah Melayu which has various versions about him and his origin. Then again it needs corroboration by other sources. At best his character still remains a legend perhaps in as much as in the case of  Robin Hood. It is the time that made romance  grow.

[ Last edited by  hamizao at 18-4-2006 12:57 PM ]

thamrong

What is knowledge? Apa itu ilmu?

To day it is almost impossible, sometime utterly confusing,  to dig up any real definition of knowledge. The simple reason is because if you are a student of philosophy, for the sake of completeness (kesempurnaan),the subject of knowledge is called epistemology [Gr.,=knowledge or science]. It is a  branch of philosophy that is directed toward theories of the sources, nature, and limits of knowledge. Yang pentingnya bukan fakta-fakta yang dimasukkan dalam otak tetapi essen-essen knowledge itu sendiri. Since the 17th century epistemology has been one of the fundamental themes of philosophers, who were necessarily obliged to coordinate the theory of knowledge with developing scientific thought. R?? Descartes- I think therefore, I am- and other philosophers (e.g., Baruch Spinoza, G. W. Leibniz, and Blaise Pascal) sought to retain the belief in the existence of innate (a priori) ideas together with an acceptance of the values of data and ideas derived from experience (a posteriori). This position was basically that of rationalism. Opposed to it later was empiricism, notably as expounded by John Locke, David Hume, and John Stuart Mill, which denied the existence of innate ideas altogether. The impressive critical philosophy of Immanuel Kant had immense effects in an attempt to combine the two views.Ini kesimpulan jalan compromi diantara fahaman rationalist dan empirist. In later theories the split was reflected in idealism and materialism. The causal theory of knowledge, advanced by Alfred North Whitehead and others, stressed the role of the nervous system as intermediary between an object and the perception of it. The methods of perceiving, obtaining, and validating data derived from sense experience has been central to pragmatism, with the teachings of C. S. Peirce, William James, and John Dewey. Sir Karl Popper developed the view that scientific knowledge rests on hypotheses that, while they cannot be positively verified, can be proven false and have withstood repeated attempts to show that they are. Philosophers in the 20th cent. have criticized and revised the traditional view that knowledge is justified true belief. A springboard for their research has been the thesis that all knowledge is theory-laden.....cogito ergo sum....

[ Last edited by  thamrong at 27-4-2006 11:47 AM ]

thamrong

Hamizao wrote:

At this point in my search, I would say that knowledge is TRUTH. The ultimate TRUTH  belongs to GOD.

I feel like you have just put a bullet in between my eyes. Ultimate truth transcends human knowledge.Plato's theory of idea tells us that what we perceive as reality or true knowledge are mere duplicate and imperfect truth. :hmm::hmm::hmm:

[ Last edited by  thamrong at 29-4-2006 12:18 PM ]

aishiteru

2 + 2 = 4

real? true? false?

hamizao

I can prove that 2 = 1.

Let , a=b
Multiply both sides by a:
a^2=ab
Subtract  b^2 from both sides:
a^2 - b^2 = ab - b^2
Factoring:
(a + b)(a - b) = b(a-b)
Divide both sides by (a - b):
a + b = b
Substitute b for a:
2a = a
Divide both sides with a:
2 = 1


So, what happens when you substitute  1 for 2 in the equation 2 + 2 = 1 + 1 = 2.

So, 2 + 2 is not always = 4
Is it?  :cak::cak::cak:

Cor .....just me feeling sleepy ...that's all.

[ Last edited by  hamizao at 1-5-2006 12:31 AM ]

aishiteru

Originally posted by hamizao at 1-5-2006 12:28 AM
I can prove that 2 = 1.

Let , a=b
Multiply both sides by a:
a^2=ab
Subtract  b^2 from both sides:
a^2 - b^2 = ab - b^2
Factoring:
(a + b)(a - b) = b(a-b)
Divide both sides by (a - b):
a  ...

:solute: what a wicked trick

we can also conclude that 2 = 1, so 1 = 1/2 so 1 = 2 = 1/2 :bgrin:

or trivial, 2a = a works if a = 0

BTW you just prove that numbers can be very deceiving :geram:

hamizao

thamrong,

Thanks for taking us through the brief  history of epistemology, if I may say so. I sense that your conclussion is somewhat parallel if not congrueous to my own. At least that is how I percieve "justified true belief" :

Truths and Beliefs are two independent entities. When Beliefs(my Notions)  have been Justified( my Proven) then they become Knowledge.
As human become more developed in the various departments, say, mind, senses and what have you, then more Beliefs/Notions may be Justified/Proven or eliminaded or replaced. There is a whole wide opportunity here for people to expound their ideas. Hence resulting in many Theories. My stand is, there is a lot more Truths out there to be Justified/Proven much of which transcends normal human faculties to comprehand. Some people may be blessed with the ability to comprehand more than others. This "unknown"  area had in the past become the "playground" of the more powerful. We fully note that in certain era, no new Ideas were expounded while in another era and place there seemed to be so many new ideas surfacing. These new Ideas are the Beliefs/Notions/Perceptions which may be "Duplicates of the imperfect Truths". Heheheheh...some may be utterly outrageous and need to be eliminated!

Why are Truths imperfect..? Is it because they are always changing.....in the state of Flux? Who or what is controlling it?

I shall sign off here for now to ponder on this. :hmm::hmm::hmm:

[ Last edited by  hamizao at 1-5-2006 11:05 PM ]

thamrong

Originally posted by ai****eru at 30-4-2006 02:59 PM
2 + 2 = 4

real? true? false?

Interesting! In philosophy there is no absolute answer. The Number 2 is meaningless if it stand by itself, a mere symbol cold and dumb. 2+2 may not be 4 to me because I might perceive your 4 as 5. What guarantee that your color yellow which you perceives  is yellow to me?:hmm::hmm:

aishiteru

Originally posted by hamizao at 1-5-2006 01:29 PM
When Beliefs(my Notions)  have been Justified( my Proven) then they become Knowledge.

i am sorry to butt in your conversation but i'm just curious to know if you consider yourself a logical positivist?

hamizao

By thamrong:

Interesting! In philosophy there is no absolute answer. The Number 2 is meaningless if it stand by itself, a mere symbol cold and dumb. 2+2 may not be 4 to me because I might perceive your 4 as 5.

I catch your drift....that is as far as  numbers go.....

It is said  that maths is not a "reality" but rather a description of reality which the human can only approximate . Some of you may have your own take on this. I would be interested to hear it. For me, I haven't even started to ponder what "reality" means.

Now, there are otherways to show that  2 + 2 not = 4,  which I better  not elaborate!. Does it mean that the description  is false?  My take on this is, it requires a further identification. So what does it tells us? That justification requires limits and boundaries???? :hmm:

By ai****eru:

i am sorry to butt in your conversation but i'm just curious to know if you consider yourself a logical positivist?

At this stage, I am not really concerned about engenreing (gee, I hope there is such a word) myself least it might limit my thoughts. However, I would say that much of what little thoughts I have on the subject seem to be  in tandem with it. Some of it's  principles are still beyond me  though.

[ Last edited by  hamizao at 2-5-2006 05:56 PM ]

thamrong

Hamizao wrote:

For me, I haven't even started to ponder what "reality" means.

Me too..Philosophy is a tough nut to crack...