ZJRP.COM
welcome to my space |
HOME  Theory of Knowledge: How can we know? |
| Theory of Knowledge: How can we know? | | Published by: webmaster 2010-03-19 |
| | I'm just curious about your thoughts on this...
How can we ever really know something? We assume that are senses are correct, that what we are perceiving is reality. But what is not always the case. I see a wall and I say its completely solid. A scientist examines the wall and points out that there are small spaces between the molecules that make up the wall. But how can the scientist be sure he is correct? How can we ever be sure of what we "know"?
This was answered by Descartes a long time ago. He said that we can never really know anything but the fact that we are individuals. The end-result of the idea that the brain is encased in a sensory mechanism leads to the idea that these senses can be manipulated in ways that make us believe irrational things.
The scientist can be sure he is correct if he does the same thing multiple times and it comes out the same every time. We have an agreement on some things because we can observe the results independently, like a glass breaking when it's thrown against a stone floor.
Towards a Liberal Education : Popper's Revolutionary Theory of ::
How do we learn then, and how does our knowledge grow? then we know that something is wrong somewhere (even if it can be difficult to locate the source
http://www.the-rathouse.com/poprevtheory.htmlHOME |
These are empirical truths, things we know because we can independently verify them. But then again, how do we know that our results and the results we hear about are not being manipulated by something?
Descartes further reasoned in a weasel-like manner that because any being that would manipulate us in such a way would be evil, and because there is only one being that COULD manipulate us in such a way (God), and He is not evil, we should be able to trust our senses. Constructivist Learning Theory::
This ideas of motivation as described here is broadly conceived to include an understanding of ways in which the knowledge can be used. Unless we know "the
http://www.exploratorium.edu/IFI/resources/constructivistlearning.htmlHOME |
We are required to believe from a practical standpoint that what our senses tell us is 'true'. In theory and objecrively this may not be the actual case (optical illusions for example are not 'true'), but in order to function, we base our entire system of knowledge on the senses.
The senses are the building blocks of knowledge, and we increas our knowledge and refine our senses based soley on that initial premise. It is not necessarily correct, but it is required and works on a practical level.
Theoretically we can assume nothing and have no absolute knowledge, but must start with the premise "if my senses are correct..."
The wall is solid from the point of view of ordinary experience -- it isn't a good idea to try to walk through it.
The wall is mostly empty space from the point of view of a scientist studying subatomic matter, and his distinct purpioses.
The first step we have to take toward knowledge is to realize that knowledge is quite generally relative to purposes. Knowledge is what works to specific ends.
"How can I know that knowledge is what works?" -- because regarding it as such avoids the disastrous tangles to which other conceptiopns lead. In other words, the pragmatic conception of knowledge is itself pragmatically successful.
 Where was the last debate on wednesday with Mccain and Obama?
 INSTANCE / WAITING FOR SPRING
|
You are looking at:zjrp.com's Theory of Knowledge: How can we know?, click zjrp.com to home
|
|