Talons Philosophy

An Open Online Highschool Philosophy Course

By

Sensing Knowledge

When determining what knowledge is, we must first ask ourselves what we know about knowledge. Knowledge is what allows us to function. Without knowledge, we would be unaware of how to be a person.

Premise 1: Knowledge is gained through our senses

As we live our daily lives, we are constantly gaining knowledge through our senses. Through sight, hearing, taste, smell, and touvh, we constantly get to experience sometimes familiar, and other times new experiences. These new experiences allow us to gain the knowledge that we hadn’t had before.

Premise 2: We can share our knowledge with others.

Not only do we gain knowledge ourselves, but we can also share our knowledge with others. There are different ways of sharing knowledge such as when we go to school. Any time we sit in a classroom and take-in new information, we are gaining knowledge that we didn’t have before. Another way to look at this is when say a parent is teaching their baby how to walk, or trying to teach them how to say “mom” or “dad”. It seems like such an easy thing to most of us because we have the knowledge of how to do that. But speaking and walking isn’t just something we know how to do naturally such as breathing. It takes time, and it takes the knowledge of others to teach the baby to walk and talk.

Conclusion: We gain knowledge not only through our senses but also through others.

Everyday we learn new things. Wether it be through our senses or through others. I feel that through our senses, we discover basic knowledge such as what certain food may smell like, or how heavy a book is. We also are able to learn how to complete tasks by using all of our sense in different ways. Learning is another way we can gain knowledge. When others teach us or educate us on things they have knowledge of. We are able to then continue to pass on that knowledge to others. It’s a cycle.

So going back to my question about what knowledge is. I’d like to think of knowledge as everything. This may sound strange, but knowledge is used in every aspect of our lives. Without knowledge, we couldn’t do anything. We wouldn’t be able to walk, talk, or do anything for ourselves. Knowledge is a very important factor in everyone’s life and it is very important in everyone’s life.

http://www.fmi.org/images/research-resources/knowledge.jpg?sfvrsn=0

http://www.fmi.org/images/research-resources/knowledge.jpg?sfvrsn=0

 

By

Knowledge is like a pomegranate – Marina

Our minds are like an endless river, with a continuous flow of water. After time, the river bed shows signs of erosion, much like our brains that are continuously learning and expanding. There is so much knowledge in this world, along with millions of people, yet nobody knows it all. We live in beds of knowledge. It surrounds us and fills the air we breathe. Our brains are like pomegranates, you’re constantly finding new pockets of delicious red seeds, that you didn’t know were there. 

__________________________________

P1- Humans are born with a sense of knowledge.

 

P2- We develop our knowledge overtime through learning experiences.

 

Conclusion- All humans are born with common human knowledge and our bodies and our minds grow through good and bad, and right and wrong experiences.

 

__________________________________

P1- When we are born, we are guided through the basics of knowledge from our parents. They teach us how to grow up so we can eventually leave the nest as a grown, mature, adult. They hold our hands, pick us up, wipe our tears, and tell us it will be okay. Although, they want to do everything in their power to make us the best we can possibly be, they have to let us fall sometimes to help us learn. As we grow, our parents grip on us loosens as they trust grows stronger.

 

P2-  Our brains when we are little are like sponges. They absorb everything. Memories- good and bad-stick with us and they help us make choices in our future so we don’t go down the wrong path.

 

Conclusion – Although you may not think everything in our lives are beneficial in the long run, in reality it does. As humans we are constantly learning. Nobody in the word knows everything. Knowledge seeps everywhere like water flows in a river bed. Knowledge is unstoppable, it will push you forward in life, and it starts new streams all the time.

 

_________________________________

 

I agree with the Philosopher Immanuel Kant because Kant stated that our experiences are structured by features of our minds. Among other things, Kant believed that the concepts of space and time are integral to all human experience, as are our concepts of cause and effect. 

Kant_Portrait.jpg

_________________________________
I am grateful for everything that has happened in my life to make me the person I am today. I wouldn’t be the same person without each thing that has occurred in my life. Each experience, each different than the last, taught me in so many different way that I didn’t know were possible.

 

By

Knowledge. – Mid Term

Knowledge is an essential aspect of life; it’s something that we strive to obtain every day both consciously and unconsciously. It’s the accumulation of a person’s experiences in life, and how he or she reacts to it. Each person has a unique reception to events, and can impact them as a person differently.

It is evident that knowledge is something that we posses as a species because we as individuals are able to develop skills and awareness as a person and use that development to grasp onto many aspects of our lives.

Proposition: Knowledge is the accumulation of information in a  person’s life experiences and how he or she directs that information through life

Premise 1: We extract information from observing and recalling the events that happen to us, by making connections

Premise 2: Humans incorporate that information into themselves and apply that information to daily life scenarios upon scenarios of need

A person obtains information when experiencing an event. When that person first experiences an event they can either accept the result of that scenario as a fact of this dimension or connect the result to previous events that happened to him or her and either confirm or agree their hypothesis. By being able to recognize that information and grasp onto it, they essentially add onto themselves and strengthen themselves as an individual in terms of knowing.

Connections can also be made to obtain information for example, a person has never ate a guava before, but has had the opportunity to taste many other fruits such as pears, apples, bananas, oranges, strawberries and several others. He may not know what a guava tastes like, but through his previous interactions with fruits, he can infer that guava would taste slightly sweet because of the white flesh,similar to pears, and have a crispness to it, similar to apples. A person can connect similarities of each different information that he has to make new information. The extraction of information, can also happen after the event has already occurred, through recalling the event and reanalyzing it.

Eventually, the extracted information becomes a part of that human, and he or she grows as a person. Humans use the information that they’ve extracted from their encounters and apply it to solve problems and help them through life. A person is constantly faced with problems that can only be solved through the development of knowledge. For instance, for a person to solve a math problem, they must first learn the fundamentals of math and learn how to apply it. Eventually, their learning of math eventually becomes a part of them and the way they think, that is knowledge.

Aristotle is a philosopher that helps to stem further into my area of thought. He is a philosopher that believed in the development of an individual through their experiences and how a person is a reflection of the accumulative experiences he or she has experienced throughout life.  To him thought is largely based on logic and empirical evidence, and it is only logical for a human to be a mirror of all that he has experienced. Like a sponge, a human soaks up experiences that happened . He also agrees that the human train of thought acts as tunnels connecting one fact to another inferring information, creating knowledge.

“Knowing yourself is the beginning of all wisdom.” – Aristotle

 

Personally for me, my knowledge is the accumulation of the experiences that I have been through and a reflection of how i reacted to each scenario. All that I  am -my roots as an individual, the traits that I default to, the composition of my morals – is a impression of the events that unraveled throughout my life.

As a child, I spent the first eight years of my life in China, and those years being in China rooted moulded me as a person. My years in China and on top of being in a very traditional oriental household forged a very unprogressive world view. It wasn’t until I came to Canada that I opened my eyes and accepted that there were different ways of thinking – and to be more accepting of people who were different. How I accepted the more liberal Canadian way of thinking changed me as a person, adding to my bank of knowledge. My experiences in China gradually turned into a piece of knowledge in my ocean of knowledge. Knowledge that renders in my mind every time I interact with someone who shares a similar belief with my former self. It is a string that helps me relate to other people, and connects me with others.

 

 

By

Knowledge| An Experience and a Conscious Mind

How much do you know? If someone asked you to spew out everything you know (based on how long you’ve lived of course) you would never be able to do pinpoint each and every moment of your life when a singular experience planted a seed of rational thought evoked through your senses —and even if you could remember every single event in your life, how would you remember each sense being stimulated to unify a conscious experience? Before jumping to conclusions (and propositions for that matter) my stance on knowledge is one that focuses on the importance and meaning of acquiring knowledge where consciousness of the mind evokes ‘hunger’ for knowledge acquisition; all through a diverse range of experiences. My point being: If one seeks to unify rational thoughts through the empirical world— and therefore gather knowledge— then the world itself has more potential to be full of meaning, and therefore so do you.

To break down and simplify my argument, a logical perspective (syllogism) is necessary to lay out my point of view on the importance of ‘knowing more’ when:

  • Knowledge is the accumulated synthesis of conscious experiences that contribute to the on-going enrichment of humanity.

 Premise 1: If knowledge emerges from a unity of consciousness (where experiences in the empirical world and rational thought intermingle), and…

Premise 2: …Conscious minds create new potentials and ideals for humanity, then…

Conclusion: …Knowledge is the accumulated synthesis of conscious experiences that contribute to the on-going enrichment of humanity.

 

Knowledge emerges from a unity of consciousness (experiential theories):

Since the time of Immanuel Kant (1700s) the notion of unifying experiences has challenged how the rational and empirical world co-exist with one another and whether objects in themselves corroborate with space or time or are simply mere representations of what our minds perceive, emerging from knowledge of prior experiences. Why is this important, one may ask, well, the human mind shares similar process of breaking down experiences in themselves through a series of stimulated senses that take place in space and time. There is something called ‘the experiential theories’ composed of the experiential parts theory (EP), which suggests that experiences are composed of separate singular experiences, and the non-experiential parts theory (NEP). I for one support the theory of non-experiential parts that suggests that multiple (singular) experiences contribute to one whole experience; therefore, I’d argue that an experience does not have parts because that is not how one remembers it and any form of knowledge gained from that experience emerges from an accumulative synthesis of multiple stimulated senses. To clarify this statement I’d like to give an example of a personal experience.

  • I was two years old, rocking back and forth on my chair in my kitchen asking for a fish-fillet (for some reason). Suddenly I fall on the ground. The sight of the ground nearing my literal downfall, the taste of blood in my mouth, the sound of my own crying while the smell of the fish fillet being cooked met the agonizing feeling of pain as my face hit the ground effortlessly. Although an advocate of experiential parts may argue that each stimulated sense was an experience in itself I rationalize and therefore unify multiple experiences recognizing them as one, simply because that is how my consciousness makes sense of it— it is how I remember the one experience and is virtually how I acquired a direct form of knowledge from this. I was conscious of each of my senses together, as aspects of a single conscious experience. In turn, I gain ‘useful’ knowledge from this, learning to never rock back and forth on a chair, for I would forgo another unpleasant experience.

Conscious minds create new potentials and ideals for humanity:

When one is conscious of their own unified experiences one is able to reflect and therefore conceptualize a new idea gained from that experience. This could be one way of defining knowledge, but as the present-day philosopher, David Kolb states, this process of reflecting on a previous experience prompting the emergence of another experience is known as something we all know— learning. Each unexplored opportunity to learn is often what enriches the human experience in reality as a person becomes more knowledgeable. The unlimited boundaries that knowledge offers is quintessential to becoming the best version of oneself which is why conscious minds create new potentials and ideals for humanity. Knowledge arises from a learning process where each experience acts as a mere building block on a pyramid of prior knowledge. Down below is a flow chart (and explanation) of David Kolb’s cycle of learning which thereby unifies experiences, ideas and actions to give knowledge an applied purpose.

1.Concrete Experience – (a new experience of situation is encountered, or a reinterpretation of existing experience).

2.Reflective Observation (of the new experience. Of particular importance are any inconsistencies between experience and understanding).

3.Abstract Conceptualization (Reflection gives rise to a new idea, or a modification of an existing abstract concept).

4.Active Experimentation (the learner applies them to the world around them to see what results).

Saul McLeod on David Kolb- Learning Styles

In essence, when a person is conscious of their on-going experiences in life, and actively takes part in this learning-cycle (stated above) then there is a pool of opportunity to grow simply because someone is more knowledgeable. By a ‘conscious mind’ I am directly addressing those who follow a cycle, causing them to pursue more forms of new knowledge; whether this is indirect or direct. In other words, you could take a history class and have someone spoon-feed you information where you would see the effect of historical events (inferring the cause but never witnessing it), or you could physically experience what it is like to be within a historical setting and therefore gain knowledge from immediate acquaintance of the place you are standing in. Anyways, that gets more complicated so lets not dive into that.

Knowledge is the accumulated synthesis of conscious experiences that contribute to the on-going enrichment of humanity:

Given the stances of the unification of experience on behalf of Immanuel Kant, myself and David Kolb’s cycle of learning, I believe that synthesizing experiences and gaining knowledge from them is essential to enrich a persons life. What I just wrote (as my blog) was one way of communicating my knowledge acquired through this learning process. Although this written process was not all that enjoyable (as it was very time consuming) I was still conscious of this experience and it did not fail to enrich my knowledge. So as my proposition states, knowledge is the accumulation of experiences that together prompts the emergence of an individual who can live a life at their peak of potential.

One thing I’d like you to take away from this is (although it may sound rude): instead of living under a rock and partaking in the blissful ignorance that society already offers in such great quantities, why not read a book, watch some TedX talks, travel more, learn about a culture, learn a language, cook, do anything that activates your conscious mind to unify (and gain knowledge) from meaningful experience.

 

REFERENCES:

Kant, Immanuel

 

McLeod, S. (2010). Kolb-Learning Styles. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html

 

Brook, A. (2001, March 27). The Unity of Consciousness. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness-unity/

 

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

 

By

Epistemology, knowledge, chocolate cover almonds…

Knowledge is a weapon that everyone cares, its something that can’t be fully explained by science. Everyone has a different view on knowledge either on what it means or where it comes from. For my epistemology midterm we had to discuss/blog about knowledge, I choose to topic about where knowledge comes from. During the first day of our assignment I didn’t know exactly where knowledge came from, all I knew was that experience played a big important part in it. But through out our class discussions I was able to come up with my belief about where knowledge comes from, like some people I do believe that we are born with certain type of knowledge aka our instincts. In this situation I believe that instincts is a kind of knowledge, and if you continue to read further I will TRY to explain…

p1: we are born with certain instincts (communication, senses etc) which can be the potential to learn new knowledge.

p2: through experiences we are able to develop/change our instincts and create knowledge.

conclusion: we are born with certain innate knowledge, that can be further develop and evolved by our experiences as we grow.



p1.

Instincts can be defined as our five senses smell, touch, hear, sight and taste; from those five senses we are able to gain different kinds of knowledge. In this case instincts to me is a “baby” step of knowledge, I believe that we are born with instincts that leads us to learn more. All babies are born with the instinct to stay alive, a study held by Yale show that a baby is able to differentiate between good or bad. They were shown a video with two different colour spoons, one (red) helped another climb a hill and the other (purple) delay the person from climbing up. After the video was shown the babies (6 and 10 month-old) had a stronger preference for the “good” spoon. For some people the experiment can be consider knowledge through experience of watching something, but I personally consider that to be an instinct of survival, because the babies had to sense which of the spoon gave the “trusting vibes”. And from instincts like survival and our five senses we are able to grow and develop, continuing the baby example, the baby now knows that they need to form a bond with someone who they feel trust and love from. They know that as soon as the are out of the womb they need to depend on someone that they feel safe in order to survive.

p2.

Experiences is something that allows us to grow and learn from, experiences like breakups or relationships can help us gain new knowledge that we didn’t know before. Knowledge gain from experiences can change through out the years, it can be affected by age, gender, generation etc. We are able to create new knowledge from the experiences we make from our five senses, for example a person can gain knowledge from touching a key on a piano, hearing the note or seeing the music. We gain knowledge about feelings from the experiences we go through, we aren’t able to know what the sound of a piano is like from reading a textbook even when one learn to read notes we are going through the experiences of learning (explanations and doing) it rather than rationally discuss about it.

Conclusion:

Knowledge…where does it come from? Well, to me, knowledge comes from experiences that change through our lifetime, and those experiences were brought to us by our five senses which I consider to be a “baby” step of knowledge. We see that through experiments and research we are able to study that even babies have instincts, to survive, and from those instincts we evolved. Humans were not born with the ability to known what a for example, piano sounds like by reading a textbook without anyone explaining it or actually play (touching keys etc) of a piano.



To the philosopher that I agree with, Kant, there are many ideas that Kant shares about his theory of knowledge. But one thing that made me realize that Kant is the answer to my final, is when he says that there are two kinds of knowledge..

1) Knowledge is mostly derived from experience

2) Part of our knowledge isn’t derived from experience

I think that the two point stood out to me is that I too believe that, but I lean more to the empiricist side. It makes sense to me that through instincts which we are born with we are able to use them and develop from them, we are able to know that we have the ability to walk or move, and through watching others walk and age we later grain the knowledge of knowing how to work. I think when Kant say that we have part of our knowledge isn’t from experience he is saying that instincts (senses) are born within, but Kant’s theory of knowledge changes through out. Kant’s work made me realize that even famous af philosophers believe that there can be two different kinds of knowledge in our world, and that their views on knowledge can change.

Kant (Katherine’s man)

 

By

Every action is an act or creation- Kirsten’s Midterm

Knowledge is a delicate thing to determine, and is often misunderstood to be the same as information. This past week I have struggled to try and define the blurred line that separates the two ideas in a sensible order.

At the beginning of my conquest I had assumed that information laid hand in hand with knowledge. I though by holding one, you must also have the other. This path swiftly fell apart as I came to see the plot holes within my own theory. Information itself is defined by merriam-webster.com as

“facts provided or learned about something or someone”

I am unsure whether this is the most accurate definition of information, I feel it is a general statement that could be applied to all information therefore valuable for the understanding of this post. This definition proves to be problematic for my assumptions, as knowledge reaches far beyond facts. Though the definition of knowledge is arguable itself, I would like to give a rough definition labelling it as an applicable understanding. This would mean not all knowledge requires information, nor does all information result in knowledge.

This is the revised version of how I have come to understand the process that defines simple information from knowledge.

Premise One – if information is only useful when stimulated

Information may lay stagnant in many ways. whether in books, genetics, or muscle memory; unused information is not constructive. By stimulating information, or creating a need for it, information soon becomes important. A book on how to replace lightbulbs may lay unread in a library for years, until someone needs to learn how to put in new lights creates a need for the information stored, and reads the book. This works in all aspects of life, whether it is a fight or flight reflex that exists in all generations of humans and may not be used for years on end, or the muscle memory of how to ride a bike, once the information is needed, it becomes useful.

Premise Two – if knowledge is applicable information

chair

a metaphor for knowledge?

This statement is where I could find the distinction between information and knowledge. To help explain this point am using an example used by Mr.Jackson in class the other day about building furniture. Pretend you have just bought a chair from Ikea, and now need to assemble it. in this scenario, we are going to pretend you have no prior experience to the function of nor building process of chairs. your chair has come with an instruction manual and you therefore have all the information you need to set up said chair. Knowledge when you have a full comprehension of how to build your chair. For some people this may require building the chair (learning kinesthetically), whereas others have a full understanding by in depth studying of the manual and internal comprehension. Either way you now have knowledge of how to build your chair because if you were required to build a duplicate chair you could.

Information is not to the same level of comprehension. In this example, I am going to use the manual once again as information. Now the manual is in a foreign language. All the information is in front of you, but you are unable to build the chair and apply this information because you cannot understand it, and have no prior exposure or information. this creates a theoretical situation where due to the inapplicable information, we cannot create knowledge.

 

Conclusion – Then, for knowledge to be gained, information must be stimulated and applied.

When information is applied, it becomes knowledge, but before this basic step happens, information first requires stimulation. By inquiry or necessity, a need for information is stimulated, and the conquest to turn this information into applicable learning and eventually knowledge will begin.

One of the reasons I am comfortable with this statement has a lot to do with the philosophies of Kant, and his view on how we gain knowledge. Kant believed that most of our aposteriori ( gained after birth) knowledge comes from exposure to new experience. This closely relates to the way my conclusion states knowledge must come from a stimulation. without the need for new knowledge in new experiences and environments, a lack of inquiry leads to no new stimulation nor exposure to new information. With no new information needed or stimulated, we do not gain knowledge.

Looking back on my previous work, I can see how this truth of knowledge has changed my life, without me even recognizing it was there. In my Plato’s cave post I had talked about how I arrived on Hiada Gwaii and was put into complete culture shock as the common poverty and different ways of life had completely changed my perspective. This not only included my views on how others less privileged than I live, but also how we could support their culture and aid in making Canada and overall better place for everyone who lives here. By exposing myself to this new experience and stimulating inquiry of the world around me, I could gain a better knowledge of how to be respectful and helpful to the community.

I am extremely grateful for the opportunities I have been given, and the knowledge I gained along the way.it is important to remember that without the inquisition and stimulation that comes with new experiences, it is difficult to apply what you know and gain knowledge.

 

By

Thinking About Thinking. (Epistemology) – Matthew Gosselin

A quick introduction to my argument: I’ve been feeling very empirical lately, and have wanted to find ways to bridge the gap between empirical science and the typically malleable ideas of philosophy. (Then again, there have been so many paradigm shifts in science that to call modern science, “solid,” or, “factual,” would be ridiculous.) I faced the question, “What is knowledge?” Often times a question such as this is destined for one of two dead ends if there isn’t a specific train of thought behind the formulation of the answer. This is because it can seem impossible to conclude an answer without perfectly true premises, or that it may seem impossible because there are an infinite number of answers depending on how you quantify or qualify knowledge. Therefore, I asked myself, “Can I tell if someone is knowledgeable?” This was easily accepted. Then arose the question, “What do knowledgeable people have in common?” I decided that people are knowledgeable because they formulate answers to difficult questions, regardless of being right or wrong. This is because their logic is valid, but may not always have true premises. To do things such as this, it requires deep concentration and dedication, which have been “proven” to amplify brain activity. This drew a connection, and after defining the principles of my argument, this is what I came up with:

Premise 1:

Knowledge by this circumstance’s definition is an awareness for something.

Premise 2:

An action of thought occurs when a sequence of neurons fire in the brain.

Premise 3:

Neurons fire at any moment in order to process and transmit information.

Premise 4:

Information can be defined as what is conveyed or represented by something or someone.

Premise 4:

Neuron activity is detectable, measurable and able to be depicted by modern technology.

Conclusion:

Knowledge is able to be shown by any and all action of thought.

Obviously, all my assumptions are based off of what modern science deems the factual correctness of my premises to be. (This is especially due to the design of machines to measure predicted things such as neuron activity, which may not be measuring what is truly happening but simply goes along with their hypotheses.) A serious idea that arises from this argument is that society’s idea of knowledge does not abide with my own consensus. There is a possibility of someone who is constantly thinking, however is never able to conclude answers to their own questions due to any number of reasons. This could be because of a mangled sense of logic in comparison to the rest of the world, or simply thinking about things such as the logical flow-chart possessed by dogs etc. (Unpopular topics or socially looked down upon, such as video games.) They would popularly be seen as dim-witted, although may be, by my definition, the most knowledgeable person alive. Without the omniscient knowledge of a higher being to understand the true nature of human beings, who knows? Then again, if that was the case, we would have the knowledge to every answer already. Hopefully it brought you enjoyment to read my thought process along my path to enlightenment!

Matthew Gosselin,

A Dedicated Philosopher

 

By

I Don’t Know What I’m Doing But I Know How To Use Capital Letters! – Claire

Hello!  Welcome to another blog post where I use capital letters to make it look like I know what I’m doing! (which, I think I might…but do I know or Know?  Let’s find out together!)

How to get through midterms 101: High School Musical and suffering together!

P1. If innate knowledge is instinctual
P2. And experiential knowledge is wisdom
Proposition: Then truth [knowledge] is determined by a synthesis of instinct and wisdom.

My first premise, innate knowledge is instinctual, is one that seems rather obvious. We don’t come out of the womb speaking a fluent language and knowing how to calculate the circumference of a circle (could you imagine?), but we do have the basis of what many would consider to be a type of knowledge. Our body knows how to function, how to keep us breathing and we have instinctual reactions; too hot? Cry! Too cold? Cry! Hungry? Cry! Desperate for attention? Cry!

Have to write a midterm? Cry!

Innate knowledge, therefore, seems to come from our body and brain’s instincts. We all have instincts, whether we are aware of them or not. We are also constantly learning whether we acknowledge this or not. To me, learning without comprehending, gaining facts and information, is the difference between knowing and Knowing. What do you mean, Claire? Are you just trying to recycle your metaphysics project? Yes! Yes, I am! (No, I’m not Mr. Jackson, I’m just trying to be funny and failing) After spending so much time thinking about being vs Being, I couldn’t let the idea go. I immediately made a connection between being vs Being and knowing vs Knowing, and it’s not just in the capital letters! Let’s review:

“It is that awareness vs your physicality that is the difference between being (existing) and Being (living).  This concept of being vs Being was brought about by German philosopher Martin Heidegger, who challenged the direction that western metaphysics had been set on.” —Did ‘The Boy Who Lived’ Truly Live, Claire Lundin (me)

Yes, I just quoted myself.  No, I am not ashamed (okay, well I am a little).  This was one of my findings in our metaphysics unit, and as previously mentioned I found a link between what I learned then and what I am now learning about knowledge.  Once again, it is awareness that makes all the difference between knowing (learning) and Knowing (being aware of your learning and comprehending it) OR knowing (instinctual) vs Knowing (wisdom). Innate knowledge tends be kept in an internal place and is not shared with others —it is merely a tool we use to function.

My second premise, experiential knowledge is wisdom, is the opposite of instinct. This kind of knowledge is acquired through time and experience. When we are exposed to things, when repetition takes place, when we use our senses and creativity, when we are engaged and ask questions and allow our minds to be curious, that is when we are Knowing. The definition of wisdom is “the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgement,” according to Oxford Dictionary. This cannot exist without time and experience, and the capability to understand and comprehend what it is that you are learning. Experiential knowledge can come from both an external and an internal place, however, in my opinion, in order for it to become wisdom you have to take this knowledge and make it external for others to grasp as well.

Now, where did these ideas come from?  After reading up on my good friend Immanuel Kant (I don’t actually know him, obviously, but this dude has helped me out a lot so in my head we are now friends, you see?) I realized we had similar ideas in the sense that we both believe you are born with knowledge, which is to say, knowledge you have before experience (a priori) and you can come to understand knowledge through experience (empirical knowledge).  In this case, a priori knowledge supports the concept of knowing while empirical knowledge supports the idea of Knowing.

Finally, my proposition: Truth [knowledge] is determined by a synthesis of instinct and wisdom. These different forms of knowledge fuse together so we can both function and learn. Similar to not being able to live (Being) without first existing (being), you cannot gain knowledge without first functioning and learning. It is how we choose to use our functioning selves, how we choose to process what we learn that becomes Knowledge.

 

By

And There Goes My Brain II-Epistemology Midterm

Firstly let’s see that this may be a little confusing because I’m just on auto-pilot at the moment but hopefully this all makes sense, I still can’t believe I can still function this far into the semester, and now we’re doing a epistemology midterm! Sooo here we go again at where I think our knowledge comes from. These  are my propositions and premises:


 

Proposition – We are born with the potential to gain knowledge

So what I mean by this is that, at birth we are given the five (5) senses, for us to be able to experience things in different ways. Such as touch, hear, see, taste, and feel things in the world of many weird things. But we don’t fully know everything just yet. So we use our senses to gain our basic knowledge like, the ability to talk, walk, speak. That means when we’re still young little boys and girls we really don’t know much yet. Until we’ve actually get into the curiosity mode in which we then start to want to try things like wanting to ride a bike, or wanting to learn how to write or read. In which help us develop our senses even more into things like fear, anger, unlike when we were little fetuses we were all just happy or sad, it was more black and white when we were younger. When we try new things to help us develop ourselves and help us develop out knowledge so it creates more shades than black and white. Like for example, athletes and scientists to contrast, athletes. So then this leads me to my premises:


 

Premise 1 – We are born with five (5) senses

In which I already kind of explained above there, at birth we are given the ability to hear, feel, see, taste, and touch things. So I believe that we are already given a sense of where we already are when we are born. We just couldn’t process it as well as we can now. All in all we were given the five sense for us to go discover the things that are out there in the big wide world we were put into. This premise then is quite easy to grasp (it had to be because there was nothing else to grasp onto)


 

Premise 2 – Through our senses, we use it to discover basic knowledge

What I mean by this is when we age, and get older and older we discover things that we were too scared to see or do or never knew how to do that certain thing. So like learning how to walk then learning how to run, or learning to speak from looking at everyone else speak, we gain the basic knowledge of speaking. Examples like learning how to ride a bike when explanations and observing, that’s how we gain basic knowledge like these.


Premise 3 – Through our experiences, we then enhance our basic knowledge

SO from my last two premises, I’ve basically said that we gain our basic knowledge from our senses. Now we use our basic knowledge to discover more knowledge. Let’s take a rocket scientist and an athlete to compare. Both of these two people would have to start off at the same route, but as we age and come in familiar with our basic knowledge and figure out our own interest we then use our basic knowledge to pursue that interest. So for rocket scientists they would have to focus on using their basic knowledge of understanding the complications and through practice and time they eventually come to a professional level. Similarly, athletes would too have to go through the same process or figuring out their interest. But for athletes to enhance their knowledge they would have to practice their physicality, and physical ability in order to move on toward enhancing their knowledge from the start.

 


The Squad who helped me think of this

At first I totally didn’t understand what any of these guys meant what they said in class, but eventually I got a little grasp and then used their ideas to come up with my proposition. The boys are Descartes and Kant, because I totally agree with Descartes that our ideas are inside our minds which we are born with, and then Kant’s theory which took a little longer to try to understand, but eventually i came to agree that knowledge are innate and also out there in the world for us to experience it. Plus I totally agree that knowledge can only be understood but only filtered through our senses.

 

ferda

 

 

 

By

Epistemology Midterm

These past five units have flown by, I can’t believe I am already writing my midterm assignment! Epistemology, like every other topic we have covered in philosophy, has left me confused. However, this idea of how our knowledge is acquired and where it comes from has really stuck with me, and is something I wanted to learn about more in depth. I struggled to decide if I was more of a rationalist, which is someone who believes that reason is the main source and test of knowledge, or an empiricist, which is someone who believes that knowledge is gained from experience. Knowledge exists everywhere and in everything; it’s various forms and theories about how it is acquired are endless. Knowledge can be direct-which is single pieces acquired through experience, or indirect which is more complex and acquired through reason. Keeping this idea of indirect and direct knowledge in mind, my blog post revolves how all knowledge made of past experiences.

I believe that we as humans are subconsciously or consciously always observing and learning about the world around us. To use the technical terms, I think all we all grow and develop through posteriori knowledge, which is knowledge that is gained after sense experience. Going along with this train of thought, it is self explanatory as to under which conditions it exists, and how we acquire knowledge in our everyday lives. To help further my understanding, I looked into the ideas of Aristotle, who is said to be among the first empiricists of the world. He said that all knowledge starts with sense experience. When we are born, we have no innate knowledge or understanding of the world; everything we learn is acquired though our senses. This idea makes a lot of sense to me, and in fact, was one of the arguments I was having with one of my classmates. To me, this idea is very logical, as we are born with our senses and nothing else. Aristotle also says that your senses cannot deceive you-this only comes when you put forth a conclusion that comes with your own theory. This is a way to rebut against rationalist theories, and was perhaps the tipping point for me to fall into the empiricist side.

I suppose the real question here is how do I know this is the right opinion? Or more so, how do I prove it? Using the example I stated previously about being born with no innate knowledge, think about growing up as a kid: Not only are you gaining knowledge about social skills through encounters with people, but you are gaining ‘book’ knowledge by the physical act of going to school and learning with an adult who is your teacher. Everything starts with that first sensory perception that is crucial to the way we think and the way we gain knowledge. These experiences come in many different forms, and they are something that every single person acquires daily.

To help represent my understanding I have created a logical argument:

Proposition: Knowledge is understood through beliefs we have acquired.

P1: A belief is produced by a reliable means of knowledge.

P2: Knowledge can only be acquired from a past experience.

Conclusion: Beliefs are composed of past experiences.

Beliefs are composed of past experiences-all the experiences we have true beliefs, therefore they are a reliable means of knowledge. Just to focus in on my conclusion, when I say beliefs I am referring to the ideas and knowledge we have about anything and everything-all which is gained through experiences. 

Epistemology is important because it helps us figure out the origins of human knowledge and how to justify what we know. I think this topic can serve as almost a basis for all the other topics we have covered, as it provides us with an understanding about ourself and the mind. From here, we can delve into philosopical inquiry about the world around us, ask questions about reality and how the world was created, and find ways to resonate our thoughts with those of previous philosophers.

Sources:

https://campus.aynrand.org/campus/globals/transcripts/aristotles-epistemology-concepts-explanation-and-the-nature-of-science

 
css.php