Your Theory of Knowledge

[anndelise]

What is your Theory of Knowledge?
From each pair, choose the one that represents your thoughts on Knowledge:

Knowledge is complex, made of highly interrelated concepts.
Knowledge is simple, made of isolated unambiguous bits or facts.

Knowledge is uncertain, it is tentative and evolving.
Knowledge is absolute, it is either right or wrong, true or false.

Knowledge can be created, it can be derived from reason.
Knowledge is handed down from authority.

[blackburry]

complex
uncertain
created.

[ashlesha]

complex.
not sure between uncertain and absolute. it depends.
can be created.

[InvisibleJim]

Logic is absolute, knowledge is uncertain.

Knowledge understands that although a model can be logically consistent that it can also be contextually inappropriate.

[ashlesha]

does "the sun rises every morning" fall under the category of logic or knowledge?
(i thought knowledge was just everything you could think of, including logic. actually i think "can be created" might fall more into logic)

[InvisibleJim]

does "the sun rises every morning" fall under the category of logic or knowledge?
(i thought knowledge was just everything you could think of, including logic. actually i think "can be created" might fall more into logic)

Knowledge as the statement is based on the assumptions that the past will repeat itself.

[anndelise]

Neither, the sun doesn't rise every morning, the earth rotates into the sun in mornings, and away from sun in evenings.
How do I know the earth rotates? I've been told that by those I assume have more knowledge and experiences than I, and I have seen videos (which in our day and age could be computer generated).

But if I go by my own, personal experiences, the sun rises in the morning. And since it has always done so in my experiences, i feel safe in assuming it will continue to.

[Reficulris]

complex
uncertain
cannot be created or handed down. it's an illusion.

[munenori2]

Not to be overly critical but these divides seem somewhat puerile, because I think most reasonable people would respond with complex, uncertain, and created. You could also go absolute because I don't think the second couple are mutually exclusive (actual facts regarding things are true or false, but our knowledge of those facts is an evolving system).

[anndelise]

When I was in school, Knowledge was treated as simple isolated facts (what year did columbus sail, what was the name of our fifth president, what's 2+2, etc). That's what we were tested for, our ability to recite facts. We weren't allowed to question our teachers' knowledge, nor what the books said. They were the authorities on the matter, and we weren't meant to try to understand it, that was the domain of college.

When I wanted to learn socionics, if I didnt limit myself to just reciting sites or paragraphs written by someone else...if I dared try to understand it, to interpret it, to re-organize it into something I found meaningful, then I was retyped as NeTi. Quite annoying, actually.

After reading the site that I got the OP from, I realized that a number of people treat socionics and their typing methodologies as simple, certain, and authorative.

Over the years I have learned that most of "Knowledge" is merely someone's lens, their way of seeing the world. I used to think the authors and teachers knew it all, but not anymore. The OP might have made it all seem so simplistic, but I also think it is interesting that by answering one over the other of a pair, even if the answer is "complex, uncertain, created", that to answer that way suggests "simple and certain".

Anyways, I will add another post with a summary of how one's Theory of Knowledge effects how they learn.

[anndelise]

Supposedly studies revealed relationships between beliefs about knowledge and the ways people study.

Simple Knowledge, Simple Learning Strategies
Simple= think they knew something when they could remember it. More likely to stop studying when they have memorized the info.
Complex= think they knew something when they understood it, could organize it, interpret it, or apply it to solve problems. More likely to keep studying it until they understand it.

Certain Knowledge, Sweeping Generalizations
Certain= conclusions are absolute if they make sweeping generalizations, and/or use words like never and always.

Authoritarian Knowledge, No Critical Thinking
Created= able to more readily generate counterarguments and alternative theories, and more likely to present sound evidence for their claims.

----
The site's recommendation for improving one's knowledge of a topic?
Pause every now and then to reflect on:
* What do you know?
* How do you know it?
* Do you know enough?
* How do you know you know enough? (My add on)

---
This is the site I got the idea from:
http://www.globalcognition.org/head-...-of-knowledge/

[FDG]

Complex and created - always,

some knowledge is absolute in the "human" realm, the basic knowledge that Jung would ascribe as "irrational" such as "this brick is black" or "the door is over there". Then there's constructed, literary or scientific knowledge which is uncertain and tentative.

[ashlesha]

Complex and created - always,

some knowledge is absolute in the "human" realm, the basic knowledge that Jung would ascribe as "irrational" such as "this brick is black" or "the door is over there". Then there's constructed, literary or scientific knowledge which is uncertain and tentative.

yeah, this is where i struggled to decide between uncertain and absolute. it can be either.
unless you want to be a blowhard and be all like BUT IS THE BRICK REALLY BLACK?!?!?!?!?!/1/1JKLEJFS

[mu4]

Complex and created - always,

some knowledge is absolute in the "human" realm, the basic knowledge that Jung would ascribe as "irrational" such as "this brick is black" or "the door is over there". Then there's constructed, literary or scientific knowledge which is uncertain and tentative.

Complex, created + uncertain/absolute in-determinism concerning knowledge is essentially constructivism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constru...t_epistemology

Complex/simple is not great terminology for this because it is confusing terminology.

Bits of knowledge is isolated, but exist only within a complex interaction of a more holistic model. The construct is a model, within the construct there may be simple isolated seperations for the purpose of coherence, comprehension and other factors..

From what I know, today objective/subjective arguments are all explained by some level of inter-subjectivity or hetero-phenomenology(kinda of different terms for similar ideas from either Analytical or Continental philosophical branches).

At the core of this I think it is a acceptance of "you can't know absolutely" limit of human understanding, and a pragmatic "what can you do about it" approach to advancement.