Define Knowledge

[Souron]

What does it mean to have knowledge, to know something?
What is knowledge?
What can a man be said to know? Can matters of existence, science, mathematics, religion, and morality be known?
Does knowledge mean different things in different contexts?

 

[Zack]

Define Knowledge

Here you go.

 

[Borachio]

Too often, I think, I confuse knowledge with certainty. That is, I only tend to say I know something if I know it with certainty. So, disappearingly rarely. When I'm being serious.

 

[Souron]

Here you go.

If you feel the first result there answers all the questions above post it, and we'll see how it holds up. I added a few.

This is a philosophy 101 question, answering it isn't as simple as it seems.

This thread was actually inspired in moving a discussion out of the Why I'm not an Atheist thread, but I wanted the opener to be more inclusive than it would be if I just quoted a few post from there.

 

[Souron]

Too often, I think, I confuse knowledge with certainty. That is, I only tend to say I know something if I know it with certainty. So, disappearingly rarely. When I'm being serious.

Is it possible to be certain about anything?

 

[Borachio]

In practice, only the one thing. So it is a narrow field.

 

[Souron]

But usually the question's like "Do you know?" and "Are you certain?" don't have an implicit no answer.

 

[Borachio]

Well, as they say, that depends on the question. (Do you know? cannot stand alone)

So, "Do you know Sandra?" I might answer yes.

"Are you certain you know Sandra?" I might answer no.

I'm not sure you mean this. What do you mean?

 

[Souron]

To know a person may be a special case.

A more typical statement might be: Do you know the capital of Canada? (Ignoring that this isn't usually meant as a yes of no question). Are you certain you know the capital of Canada?

How many different things can "know the capital of Canada" mean?

 

[Borachio]

Ah, but there's "Do you know the capital of Canada?" And "Do you know (what) the capital of Canada (is)"?

I presume you mean by the former "Do you know the capital of Canada (well)?" or perhaps "(How well) do you know the capital of Canada?"
edit: or even "Do you know the capital of Canada (at all)?"


But is this epistemology or semantics?

I'm not sure a person is a special case.

 

[Souron]

Ah, but there's "Do you know the capital of Canada?" And "Do you know (what) the capital of Canada (is)"?

I presume you mean by the former "How well do you know the capital of Canada?" or perhaps "Do you know the capital of Canada (well)"?

Right, I meant it as a yes or no question.

But is this epistemology or semantics?

Well the point is to ask about epistemology, but I have some difficulty totally decoupling the question from semantics. It's a similar question to "What is free will?".

I'm not sure a person is a special case.

It's different from knowing facts, and it can be different from knowing things. It's usually one thing to ask "Do you know Brian?" and another to ask "Do you know yourself?". And you could say "Do you know brain?" with the meaning of the second question if you made it clear you meant it that way.

 

[Borachio]

So if I say yes, does that mean I know the capital is Ottawa, or I know the capital (of Canada Quebec) is Quebec, or the capital (letter) is "C", or I know the capital is Toronto (i.e. my knowledge is false - if it isn't Toronto)? Does it mean I know what a capital is?

But what does it mean to say "I know"?

What are the defining characteristics of knowledge?

 

[Souron]

So if I say yes, does that mean I know the capital is Ottawa, or I know the capital (of Canada Quebec) is Quebec, or the capital (letter) is "C", or I know the capital is Toronto (i.e. my knowledge is false - if it isn't Toronto)? Does it mean I know what a capital is?

But what does it mean to say "I know"?

What are the defining characteristics of knowledge?

Well yeah the point it to identify what "to know" means, not disambiguate all the other words. Also, often language has short forms of longer sentences. For example "Do you know Mark?" might mean "Do you know which person is mark?" It's not my point to ask for an enumeration of all the things "to know" can be short for something, especially when the longer form still contains the word "know". It is my point to ask what to know means in the longer sentence is. ie. What are sufficient qualification to claim to know which person Mark is. Or some other state-able fact.

In your case you've said there are at least two meanings of what it means to know a fact: to know for certain, and to know. Are there more meanings? What is sufficient for each of the two definitions?

 

[Borachio]

What do you think of this?:

For a statement to be considered knowledge, it must be

• justified
• true
• believed
  
  
  

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Related to the knowledge of God question, for me the term 'god' is much more ambiguous than 'knowledge'.

I would claim knowledge wrt the existence of the Christian god, while indeed not being 100% certain. Just that my reasoning led that a clear conclusion. (i'll not give that reasoning here, so don't ask. You know who you are). The God Alone Is god however is a more illusive bugger to throw any kind of non-existence reasoning at. So beside from not being 100% sure I also don't have knowledge.

 

[Souron]

What do you think of this?:

For a statement to be considered knowledge, it must be

• justified
• true
• believed

Great. Though that's one definition, not two. Presumably it's the stricter one. What's the weaker one you you mentioned, when you don't know with certainty?

 

[Borachio]

Ah, you've lost me. I must re-read your postings with more care.

The JTB is the "when you don't know with certainty". At least for me it is. But then to see that you have to go into what JTB each mean.

Certainty almost invariably escapes us.

 

[Souron]

Ah, you've lost me. I must re-read your postings with more care.

Don't bother.

The JTB is the "when you don't know with certainty". At least for me it is. But then to see that you have to go into what JTB each mean.

Certainty almost invariably escapes us.

Oh ok. In that case, what's the exact standard for certainty that all knowledge fails to meet?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Could it be that knowledge is limited because it needs observation (which is limited)?

 

[Souron]

Could it be that knowledge is limited because it needs observation (which is limited)?

So then do we know everything we observe?