is not knowing enough. It is the being with the knowing that is
knowing indeed.
On Nov 3, 3:19 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> More and more, I find myself preferring a quiet mind, beyond the
> thinking about knowing.
>
> On Nov 3, 3:54 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I do see why "you" should considering the Knowledge vs Belief as a
> > teaser. It is valid question and has a defined answer.
>
> > Knowledge is preferable than Belief... because -
>
> > 1) It is found on known FACTS, usually many more than those specific
> > to a central matter < way to Larissa >, triggering familiarity with
> > surrounding terrain too ! So, if there was a cloudburst or a landslide
> > on the way of belief, knowledge will perhaps offer an alternate way or
> > the nearest shelter.
>
> > 2) It comes in a package including the knowledge of secondary or
> > adjunct facts, paths and PROCESSES, tertiary and sub - processes...
> > which makes our awareness of any matter, thing, being, person, event
> > or phenomena more complete, detailed and certain.
>
> > 3) It always leads to MORE KNOWLEDGE... more accurate, more extensive,
> > things new, more deep...
>
> > So, why is it considered a teaser... to those of us ?
>
> > On Nov 3, 1:38 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > The question why knowledge is distinctively valuable has an important
> > > historical precedent in Plato's Meno in which Socrates raises the
> > > question of why knowledge is more valuable than mere true belief.
> > > Initially, we might appeal to the fact that knowledge appears to be of
> > > more practical use than true belief in order to mark this difference
> > > in value, but, as Socrates notes, this claim is far from obvious on
> > > closer inspection. After all, a true belief about the correct way to
> > > Larissa is surely of just as much practical use as knowledge of the
> > > way to Larissa—both will get us to our destination. Given that we
> > > clearly do value knowledge more than mere true belief, the fact that
> > > there is no obvious explanation of why this should be so creates a
> > > problem. We will call the issue of why knowledge is more valuable than
> > > mere true belief, the Meno problem.
>
> > > You can get the rest here -http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-value/
>
> > > I somehow doubt I will be causing much mouse clicking in posting the
> > > link! I did some work on knowledge justification and value whilst
> > > bored out of my tree, recovering from a serious injury. I was
> > > discovering most of academic study is 'witterpiss for wuckfits' at the
> > > time. There's a big snag in the Meno problem in that it restricts us
> > > to argument not much informed by science. We could sit down all day
> > > trying to define knowledge, which might be nice under the Greek sun
> > > with some Rakis, local beer and imported coffee. No one has defined
> > > knowledge - rather as we don't have a precise decimal for pi. There
> > > are, of course, many definitions.
>
> > > There are lots of teasers like this in philosophy. My take on this
> > > is :
> > > 1.there are some things I believe true and have tested scientifically
> > > or in mathematical proof - these I trust as knowledge
> > > 2. there are some things I think true and can't do the above with.
> > > 3. etc. etc. on what I consider reliable or barking.
>
> > > we worry too much about this kind of stuff and not enough about the
> > > issues of the condition of ignorance.
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário