1
   

Knowing & Understanding

 
 
coberst
 
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2005 05:32 am
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 646 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2005 07:40 am
To "know" is to "successfully predict".
To "understand" is to have "a rationale" to support the prediction.

E.g.

I "know" this switch operates the light.
I "understand" that the switch completes an electrical circuit.

I "know" that Henry VIII had six wives (I predict reading this in a history book).
I "understand" how Henry managed to usurp the Popes authority in order to "annul marriages".

All understanding is limited by assumption of at least one axiom (Godel Theorem).
All "knowledge" is subject to context.
0 Replies
 
coberst
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2005 08:59 am
Fresco

Is a multiple choice exam an accurate way to determine understanding? How did you decide which fact was knowledge and which was understanding? Please don't answer with Godel's Theorem I hardly know the woman.
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2005 09:03 am
coberst wrote:
Fresco

Is a multiple choice exam an accurate way to determine understanding? How did you decide which fact was knowledge and which was understanding? Please don't answer with Godel's Theorem I hardly know the woman.


Nope. It can be measured by an essay. An explaination of the answer and the reasoning behind why you came to the answer you did. The understanding of an answer, versus memorization of an answer. Math tests where you have to work the problem are ways to determine understanding because you must show that you know how you got to the answer.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2005 11:10 am
coberst,

I agree with Bella Dea regarding "understanding", and I would say "facts" are publically agreed "knowledge".

The difference between knowledge and understanding is that the latter is a network of "knowledge" from which other "knowledge/predictions" can be infered.

The segmentation of such a network into discrete "facts" tends to be arbitrary and the network tends to resist "counter examples" by virtue of its interdependent weblike structure.. Thomas Kuhn outlined this resistance prior to a potential paradigm shift in "Structure of Scientific Revolutions". New paradigms such as Relativistic Physics tend to delimit earlier ones such as Newtonian Physics rather than dismiss them out of hand. Hence in the teaching and learning of a subject there are various levels of understanding according to the breadth of the paradigm adopted and the observations embraced. There is no ultimate paradigm (Godel :wink: ).
0 Replies
 
coberst
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Dec, 2005 12:25 pm
Bella

I s addition knowledge or understanding? Is calculus knowing or understanding?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Knowing & Understanding
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/12/2024 at 02:16:43