0
   

Can something be identical to the knowledge of something?

 
 
Reply Sat 27 Aug, 2016 12:30 pm
Can X be the same as the knowledge of X?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 780 • Replies: 9
No top replies

 
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Aug, 2016 01:07 pm
@Thomas33,
I think Tom that'd require us simply to rename "the knowledge of X" as simply "X"

Help a mental retard (me) someone
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Aug, 2016 03:57 pm
@Thomas33,
X is whatever you want it to be. However, for it to have meaning, you need to include a definition for it.
X is used in math.
X = X
Thomas33
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Aug, 2016 05:41 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Assuming that X is anything, can the anything in question be identical to the knowledge of the anything?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Aug, 2016 05:42 pm
@Thomas33,
As far as humans are able to describe it.
0 Replies
 
George
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Aug, 2016 08:15 pm
One word: "of".
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Aug, 2016 12:01 am
@Thomas33,
Esse est percepi (Berkeley) is one principle which supports your statement. If you look it up you will find discussion of its epistemological significance, but your somewhat unfocused posting regime tends to indicate that you don't do much research.
Chatting is one thing, philosophical analysis another.
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Aug, 2016 11:31 am
@fresco,
Yea Fres. Now if it's no trouble I wonder if you's mind translating the OP for the benefit of any lunkheads in the crowd (me)
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Aug, 2016 02:53 pm
@dalehileman,
The key issue concerns the assignment of the term 'thing', which indicates 'a focus of human attention' to an aspect of what humans call 'the world'. Berkeley's principle 'to be is to be perceived' indicates the role of the perceiver in establishing 'thinghood', and since perception involves 'significance to the observer' that significance implies 'knowledge of utility of focus'.
Anthropology yields examples of how knowledge through socialization affects perception and 'thinghood'.E.g. Some cultures have two words for our single concept of 'water', one involving 'water you are allowed to drink' and the other 'sacred water' that you may not drink. This segmentation of 'the world' is not merely a cultural curiosity, but is also reflected in our own evolution of, say, the term 'elements' , from the historical four (earth, air , fire water) in accordance with what we call 'scientific progress'.
So, the full implication of the OP, opens up the full epistemological spectrum which investigates the interplay between 'existence' and 'knowledge' and their interplay through words for 'things' which sets up perceptual expectancies. And unless you are a materialist/naive realist, 'perception' is active not passive..
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Aug, 2016 04:22 pm
@fresco,
Thank you Fres for that clarification
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Can something be identical to the knowledge of something?
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/19/2019 at 03:18:25