a new definition of knowledge
a new definition of knowledge
knowledge = the concurrence/intersection/conjunction of evidence
All of those do a good job, but i think concurrence does the best work.
All of those do a good job, but i think concurrence does the best work.
-
- Posts: 4305
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: a new definition of knowledge
concurrence? swimming with the stream is easier...
-Imp
-Imp
-
- Posts: 2119
- Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am
Re: a new definition of knowledge
Experience is knowledge.
-
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2018 3:35 am
Re: a new definition of knowledge
A definition, of knowledge:
The bridge, that runs from spirituality's long con, of responsibility-mutual meaning/producing the deflection of help from independence to independence (in which the independence to independence permission to responsibility-mutual is comprised of the independence's political ambition for definition), to the Monica Potter/Alex Cross (a top down spirituality building, of Potter's baiting spirituality for physics (a manifestation, of term combos of actual v actual physics) to Cross's long as commander).
The bridge, that runs from spirituality's long con, of responsibility-mutual meaning/producing the deflection of help from independence to independence (in which the independence to independence permission to responsibility-mutual is comprised of the independence's political ambition for definition), to the Monica Potter/Alex Cross (a top down spirituality building, of Potter's baiting spirituality for physics (a manifestation, of term combos of actual v actual physics) to Cross's long as commander).
-
- Posts: 6591
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: a new definition of knowledge
concurrance of evidence with other evidence? So plural instances of evidence.
Or concurrance of evidence with something else?
There are other ways to use that word, also, so I am looking for clarification.
Intersection would raise the same kind of questions for me. As would conjunction.
-
- Posts: 6591
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: a new definition of knowledge
So, if you are older than someone, and thus have more experience, are you necessarily more knowledgeable?
-
- Posts: 2119
- Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am
Re: a new definition of knowledge
Iwannaplato,Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 7:50 pmSo, if you are older than someone, and thus have more experience, are you necessarily more knowledgeable?
Old age does not guarantee knowledge volume or wisdom, experiencing is simply gaining knowledge of the world.
-
- Posts: 6591
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: a new definition of knowledge
So, if you are older, you have more knowledge of the world than the ones you are older than? Can we say that 30 year olds have more knowledge of the world than 29 year olds?popeye1945 wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 7:56 pmIwannaplato,Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 7:50 pmSo, if you are older than someone, and thus have more experience, are you necessarily more knowledgeable?
Old age does not guarantee knowledge volume or wisdom, experiencing is simply gaining knowledge of the world.
You mention that old age does not guarantee knowledge volume, but if experience is knowledge than why not?
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7106
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: a new definition of knowledge
Sure, it's important that we are all more rather than less on the same page regarding what we claim to know is true.
But my own main interest in definitions revolves more around the extent to which we can take our own out into the world of actual human interactions. In particular, those interactions that come into conflict given, in turn, how the definitions we give to the words we use to explain and then to defend our moral and political value judgments come into conflict.
Thus, pertaining to this, how would one apply this definition...
"knowledge = the concurrence/intersection/conjunction of evidence"
...to a moral or political conflagration most here are likely to be familiar with?
Of course, if this is just a "technical" discussion then...never mind.
But my own main interest in definitions revolves more around the extent to which we can take our own out into the world of actual human interactions. In particular, those interactions that come into conflict given, in turn, how the definitions we give to the words we use to explain and then to defend our moral and political value judgments come into conflict.
Thus, pertaining to this, how would one apply this definition...
"knowledge = the concurrence/intersection/conjunction of evidence"
...to a moral or political conflagration most here are likely to be familiar with?
Of course, if this is just a "technical" discussion then...never mind.
Re: a new definition of knowledge
Knowledge is the coherence observed in the events.
-
- Posts: 6591
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: a new definition of knowledge
If mind observes it then yes, mind knows something.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue May 24, 2022 8:26 pmSo, if the events have coherence a mind knows something?
-
- Posts: 2119
- Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am
Re: a new definition of knowledge
[/quote] So, if you are older, you have more knowledge of the world than the ones you are older than? Can we say that 30 year olds have more knowledge of the world than 29 year olds?You mention that old age does not guarantee knowledge volume, but if experience is knowledge than why not? [/quote]
Iwannaplato,
One person can have greater or lesser intelligence than the average and even intelligence is not a guarantee of wisdom. Also, some people have a much wider range of experiences than others inferring greater levels of knowledge.
Iwannaplato,
One person can have greater or lesser intelligence than the average and even intelligence is not a guarantee of wisdom. Also, some people have a much wider range of experiences than others inferring greater levels of knowledge.
Re: a new definition of knowledge
[quote=Iwannaplato post_id=574423 time=1653418138 user_id=3619]
[quote=Advocate post_id=570862 time=1651805849 user_id=15238]
knowledge = the concurrence/intersection/conjunction of evidence
All of those do a good job, but i think concurrence does the best work.
[/quote]
concurrance of evidence with other evidence? So plural instances of evidence.
Or concurrance of evidence with something else?
There are other ways to use that word, also, so I am looking for clarification.
Intersection would raise the same kind of questions for me. As would conjunction.
[/quote]
Yes Whatever is most centrally indicated by all available evidence, that's truth, knowledge, whatever, as close as we can get. I looked up the words and i reckon they're all good enough for most purposes.
[quote=Advocate post_id=570862 time=1651805849 user_id=15238]
knowledge = the concurrence/intersection/conjunction of evidence
All of those do a good job, but i think concurrence does the best work.
[/quote]
concurrance of evidence with other evidence? So plural instances of evidence.
Or concurrance of evidence with something else?
There are other ways to use that word, also, so I am looking for clarification.
Intersection would raise the same kind of questions for me. As would conjunction.
[/quote]
Yes Whatever is most centrally indicated by all available evidence, that's truth, knowledge, whatever, as close as we can get. I looked up the words and i reckon they're all good enough for most purposes.
Re: a new definition of knowledge
Iwannaplato wrote: So, if you are older, you have more knowledge of the world than the ones you are older than? Can we say that 30 year olds have more knowledge of the world than 29 year olds?You mention that old age does not guarantee knowledge volume, but if experience is knowledge than why not?
- Accurate knowledge consists of remembered inferences that have been validated by either first-hand experience or by another first-hander.popeye1945 wrote:Iwannaplato,
One person can have greater or lesser intelligence than the average and even intelligence is not a guarantee of wisdom. Also, some people have a much wider range of experiences than others inferring greater levels of knowledge.
- Wisdom consists of accurate current inferences that solve a problem.
- Wisdom requires knowing the root of all problems.
- Self-cherishing lies at the root of every problem.
- Solomon likely knew, through accurate conclusions made from observation, that in principle a mother feels no separation from her child.
- A mother cherishes her child, as she cherishes herself.
- Concern for her child, is actually self-cherishing.
- Everyone self-cherishes when facing the final arbiter, with no more reasonable or emotional appeals to be heard.
- Solomon’s Wisdom* overcomes objections by applying accurate knowledge to reveal truth, within the context of a situation’s elemental relationships, such as that between the element of child and the element of mother.
* 1 Kings 3:16-28 KJV