The big question of my life...

[DarkNick]

As I'm sitting on my bed now and almost every night I wonder about humans and what they are capable of.I especially wonder about myself and knowledge.Does knowledge exist?Is knoledge a power?Can someone has some power based on knowledge?If someone says that has som sort of it,will he be powerful or just lame?In the end what do we know and if we know something,is it more than the 1/1000 of the things out there
What's your opinion about that topic?

[Patchy]

Moving to ROTW, I can see a debate starting.

[Jawbreaker]

Well, if knowledge doesn't exist, then how do you know what you're asking when you say "Does knowledge exist?" It seems to me that without knowledge of the words you are using, your question would be meaningless. Next, wouldn't you know if your question has an answer or not, or even if it makes sense or has meaning? It seems that no matter how you slice it, you cannot deny the existence of knowledge. I'm not exactly convinced by nihilistic arguments either.

As to your other questions, it all depends on how we define things. If by power you mean something that influences our view of things, then yes, without a doubt. If by power you mean the capability of influencing those around us, then the answer would be yes, but only to an extent. And when you ask "can someone have power based upon knowledge" it again comes down to what you mean. Can knowledge of certain things lead to power? Certainly. Knowledge of where a well is in a desert town can very well mean coming into a powerful position; knowledge of special trades or crafts can increase your wealth and, especially in capitalist societies like ourselves, such knowledge would be key to holding a powerful position. On the other hand, if by power you mean the ability to expand your mind, then the answer would be undeniably yes, as knowledge leads to more knowledge...at least, usually.

At any rate, we do not know a lot of things. In fact, a lot of the things we "know" aren't certainties. They are things we logically induce but which can be wrong. At the end of the day, I side with empiricists on this one--only more experiences can lead us to more accurate knowledge. Probability theory aids us in finding out which things are most likely to be true, and thus, by implication, to what we can know. If the evidence points overwhelmingly to one side, then we can cite mathematical limits (not sure how much of Calculus you know) to demonstrate that we can, more or less, know something for certain.

Of course, even this depends on two key assumptions: that mathematics is an axiomatical truth (that is, something that is true in all possible worlds) and that some sort of external reality exists. Of course, in the world of philosophy, even these two seemingly uncontroversial claims are without much backing, which leads to things like the brain in the vat, the veil of perception, and even Berkeley's Immaterialism. At any rate, I wouldn't be too concerned with epistemology unless you're planning on becoming a philosopher. It's a frustrating field that has had many unanswered (and probably unanswerable) questions, so don't stress out about it.

[Sage]

You're treading on territory that has infinitely more questions than answers.

[DarkNick]

Well, if knowledge doesn't exist, then how do you know what you're asking when you say "Does knowledge exist?" It seems to me that without knowledge of the words you are using, your question would be meaningless. Next, wouldn't you know if your question has an answer or not, or even if it makes sense or has meaning? It seems that no matter how you slice it, you cannot deny the existence of knowledge. I'm not exactly convinced by nihilistic arguments either.

As to your other questions, it all depends on how we define things. If by power you mean something that influences our view of things, then yes, without a doubt. If by power you mean the capability of influencing those around us, then the answer would be yes, but only to an extent. And when you ask "can someone have power based upon knowledge" it again comes down to what you mean. Can knowledge of certain things lead to power? Certainly. Knowledge of where a well is in a desert town can very well mean coming into a powerful position; knowledge of special trades or crafts can increase your wealth and, especially in capitalist societies like ourselves, such knowledge would be key to holding a powerful position. On the other hand, if by power you mean the ability to expand your mind, then the answer would be undeniably yes, as knowledge leads to more knowledge...at least, usually.

At any rate, we do not know a lot of things. In fact, a lot of the things we "know" aren't certainties. They are things we logically induce but which can be wrong. At the end of the day, I side with empiricists on this one--only more experiences can lead us to more accurate knowledge. Probability theory aids us in finding out which things are most likely to be true, and thus, by implication, to what we can know. If the evidence points overwhelmingly to one side, then we can cite mathematical limits (not sure how much of Calculus you know) to demonstrate that we can, more or less, know something for certain.

Of course, even this depends on two key assumptions: that mathematics is an axiomatical truth (that is, something that is true in all possible worlds) and that some sort of external reality exists. Of course, in the world of philosophy, even these two seemingly uncontroversial claims are without much backing, which leads to things like the brain in the vat, the veil of perception, and even Berkeley's Immaterialism. At any rate, I wouldn't be too concerned with epistemology unless you're planning on becoming a philosopher. It's a frustrating field that has had many unanswered (and probably unanswerable) questions, so don't stress out about it.

I see...Your name represents your personality,you are a Jawbreaker indeed (In a good way I mean :P ).I haven't seen such a ''full'' answer for many years.But still I feel that there's much more on this...Even the most accurate answer looks like a circle that answer a tiny bit of a question...Ah damn I feel lost again!

P.S: Yes I want to be somehow a philosopher,not in it's full form but I'm planning to be a psychologist and not to give up on this attitude of mine about finding answers on topics like this one! ;) I don't know if it will end up good or bad but I will find out...

Oh and btw thanks for the move Patchy.I just wasn't sure where to put my questions! :P

[AllThatYouDreamed]

You're treading on territory that has infinitely more questions than answers.

Also known as a rhetorical question?

Knowledge obviously has to exist, but I doubt it in the literal form we think of when someone says the word.
What we know, and our understanding of the "facts" is based on our experiences which form our perception of the world. Our experiences are really based off others, as their experiences effected how they treated us.

Um. I think what this comes down to is that there's no ONE knowledge, though everyone has a knowledge.

[Sage]

Knowledge obviously has to exist

Why?

[DarkNick]

Also known as a rhetorical question?

Knowledge obviously has to exist, but I doubt it in the literal form we think of when someone says the word.
What we know, and our understanding of the "facts" is based on our experiences which form our perception of the world. Our experiences are really based off others, as their experiences effected how they treated us.

Um. I think what this comes down to is that there's no ONE knowledge, though everyone has a knowledge.

Indeed.But how do we know that our perception is right.I mean when we say that we know something how do we know that it isn't wrong?

[AllThatYouDreamed]

Why?

Damn, you're good.
If it's all perception, does anything exist though?

[Azunite]

We invented porn, hands down.

[RoseyCadaver]

As I'm sitting on my bed now and almost every night I wonder about humans and what they are capable of.I especially wonder about myself and knowledge.Does knowledge exist?Is knoledge a power?Can someone has some power based on knowledge?If someone says that has som sort of it,will he be powerful or just lame?In the end what do we know and if we know something,is it more than the 1/1000 of the things out there
What's your opinion about that topic?

Humans are quite capable of many things,lately it seems our forte has been destruction.None the less we're capable of doing stuff.

Knowledge I think exist through a perspective(everything can exist through a perspective ^^ ).I do think knowledge is power,look how many evil people have used it(one case,Hitler).

Many of these things can't really be answered,well humans are so tiny and finite,we can try to figure this world out,but in the end we don't really know,through my perspective.

[AllThatYouDreamed]

Indeed.But how do we know that our perception is right.I mean when we say that we know something how do we know that it isn't wrong?

How do we know their knowledge of it is right, though?

[DarkNick]

Humans are quite capable of many things,lately it seems our forte has been destruction.None the less we're capable of doing stuff.

Knowledge I think exist through a perspective(everything can exist through a perspective ^^ ).I do think knowledge is power,look how many evil people have used it(one case,Hitler).

Many of these things can't really be answered,well humans are so tiny and finite,we can try to figure this world out,but in the end we don't really know,through my perspective.

I like your answer...Yes our end will be our self destruction 'cause when we gain knowledge we want to use it against someone else usually...And we are so tiny indeed and that's why I believe that we do know almost NOTHING about anything...
How do we know their knowledge of it is right, though?
We don't!
We all create something and we hope that it is correct.I though that a theory that I created was right and everyone thought that too until one day someone came and crushed by saying other things better than mine...
So does reality really exists?If knowledge doesn't exist then reality doesn't exist either!
The only thing that is right though and it exists correctly as knowledge is maths,physics and languages 'cause all of us think of these with the same way.

(I guess that I answered a question that I had didn't I ? :P I should be afraid of myself sometimes!!! :P )

[Jawbreaker]

How do we know their knowledge of it is right, though?

We can use Probability Theory to filter out things that aren't likely to be true and this is done through mathematical means (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes%27_theorem) and informational theory like Kolmogorov Complexity (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity) to try and get to the things that are most likely to be correct based on our observations, knowledge, etc.

Of course, this relies on three assumptions: 1. mathematics are an axiomatical truth (and I really can't see a way to disprove this or undermine this claim; after all, to do so you'd need to use mathematics to show us it's improbable that this is correct!) 2. there exists an external reality and 3. our perceptions of this external reality are pretty accurate.

Of these, even if 2 seems the most damaging, the one we really need to look out for is 3. 2 isn't much of a problem because even if we do pick-up idealism (that is, everything is ideas) the worst that can happen is that everything is perceptions, but we can still use probability theory and etc. to figure out how these perceptions work and how likely they are to be true. And, given recent findings in neurology of how the brain works, the arguments that lead to idealism have been seriously undermined (although, if you want to get technical, the methods of science were used to undermine idealism but since idealism undermines these methods, it is still technically "undefeated") and...strangely enough, recording cameras. Berkeley suggested that without perceivers, nothing exists, yet if we leave a camera running and turn away from what it is recording, the objects are still there, so it contradicts what Immaterialism predicts. So, to summarize, even if 2 is wrong, we can still use the methods of inquisition that we already do though a few of our understanding of the nature of reality would change.

Now 3 is really tough to answer. I really don't see a way we can satisfactorily answer. My response to this is what I call the immortality test: if what we perceived was so wildly different from what actually is, then shouldn't we expect to get hurt and die more often? After all, if there ISN'T flat ground in front of me but a cliff, wouldn't I end up dying a mysterious death (assume that everyone else also sees a plain floor and a dead body when in reality there is a huge cliff)? Instead, we find consistency and a lot of consensus in our experience of reality (indeed, if no such consensus existed, language would fail!), so, even if we can't tell for sure, it seems that the best we can do is just go on with this assumption and hope for the best...

I hope this all made sense.

[DarkNick]

We can use Probability Theory to filter out things that aren't likely to be true and this is done through mathematical means (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes%27_theorem) and informational theory like Kolmogorov Complexity (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity) to try and get to the things that are most likely to be correct based on our observations, knowledge, etc.

Of course, this relies on three assumptions: 1. mathematics are an axiomatical truth (and I really can't see a way to disprove this or undermine this claim; after all, to do so you'd need to use mathematics to show us it's improbable that this is correct!) 2. there exists an external reality and 3. our perceptions of this external reality are pretty accurate.

Of these, even if 2 seems the most damaging, the one we really need to look out for is 3. 2 isn't much of a problem because even if we do pick-up idealism (that is, everything is ideas) the worst that can happen is that everything is perceptions, but we can still use probability theory and etc. to figure out how these perceptions work and how likely they are to be true. And, given recent findings in neurology of how the brain works, the arguments that lead to idealism have been seriously undermined (although, if you want to get technical, the methods of science were used to undermine idealism but since idealism undermines these methods, it is still technically "undefeated") and...strangely enough, recording cameras. Berkeley suggested that without perceivers, nothing exists, yet if we leave a camera running and turn away from what it is recording, the objects are still there, so it contradicts what Immaterialism predicts. So, to summarize, even if 2 is wrong, we can still use the methods of inquisition that we already do though a few of our understanding of the nature of reality would change.

Now 3 is really tough to answer. I really don't see a way we can satisfactorily answer. My response to this is what I call the immortality test: if what we perceived was so wildly different from what actually is, then shouldn't we expect to get hurt and die more often? After all, if there ISN'T flat ground in front of me but a cliff, wouldn't I end up dying a mysterious death (assume that everyone else also sees a plain floor and a dead body when in reality there is a huge cliff)? Instead, we find consistency and a lot of consensus in our experience of reality (indeed, if no such consensus existed, language would fail!), so, even if we can't tell for sure, it seems that the best we can do is just go on with this assumption and hope for the best...

I hope this all made sense.

Yeap what you say makes sense..
So I guess that it is a question that can't be fully answered... (?) :what:

[Genghis Khan]

As I'm sitting on my bed now and almost every night I wonder about humans and what they are capable of.I especially wonder about myself and knowledge.Does knowledge exist?Is knoledge a power?Can someone has some power based on knowledge?If someone says that has som sort of it,will he be powerful or just lame?In the end what do we know and if we know something,is it more than the 1/1000 of the things out there
What's your opinion about that topic?

1. Does knowledge exist? - I don't know. Do I exist? Or am I just some delusion? Do we as human beings exist? Fuck. Sage was right, this will provoke more questions than answers.

Well, logically if knowledge is defined as information/skills that is achieved through education/experience and this concept can be used to influence others and the way they think then, yes, knowledge exists. It's because of knowledge that I know the earth is round and not flat (I don't care about your religious beliefs). I may sound really ignorant to people who have debated more on this, hence why I'm already so enthralled and fascinated by this topic as well as people's opinions on it.

2. Is knowledge a power? - If you are able to use that knowledge to your advantage and convince people what is wrong and right then you have changed an opinion (also taking into account debating skills/charisma), plus, with that gained knowledge it is possible you can make less mistakes as opposed to people who lack it. So if it is so advantageous then, I can safely assume it is powerful.

3. If someone says that has som sort of it,will he be powerful or just lame? - People with knowledge are highly unlikely to be regarded as lame. Unless your name is Stephen Hawking (OH NO HE DIDN'T).

4. In the end what do we know and if we know something,is it more than the 1/1000 of the things out there - Most people barely even fill out 1% of their brain's knowledge capacity. So I assume, if our brains have so much space, we are failing at using it to our advantage.

This is a very cool question indeed.


Edit(Thor): Don't double post, instead, use the 'Edit' button next time.

[RoseyCadaver]

FUcKIn' rhetorical questions xD!

I still say it's a matter of the you perceive things,or a certain view.In my opinion ,when it comes to philosophy,he who wants to be right,is right.