home

for our revised documentation of our understanding. Below is simply where our process began. Thank you.
====

====

Andrew: Knowledge is the collected information of an individuals experiences and education, whether that education be formal or informal. We collect information in our travels, cultural encounters, and surroundings. Some knowledge will evolve into reflex, as the owner of that knowledge repeatably puts it into practice over their lifetime. For example as a motorcyclist learns the process of driving a standard engine, selecting gears becomes unconscious; this process is thought to be reflexive and organic. ==== Mo: Knowledge is everything a person or a society holds to be true and of merit. Knowledge can be fact or intuition; and it is an ongoing process of learning and creating. Knowledge resides in the heart, soul, and of course the brain. All of these factors have an impact on decision making abilities. The more knowledge we possess the better our ability to make decisions. A child can answer a question very simply without stress, as the amount of knowledge they possess is typically low. This can almost be an advantage, as a child is able to learn new things much faster. ====

====The root word of knowledge, know is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as "be aware of through observation, inquiry, or information...(and) be absolutely certain or sure about something". The definition of knowledge is widely disputed around the world among scholars. I would argue that knowledge is factual, stored universally, and the application of it is a matter of intelligence. As a whole I view knowledge as the retention and development of data, which is utilized to form information. That can then be applied globally by intelligent beings for means important or not. Whether you are looking at a situation, academic article or conversing with another person you encounter raw data and information daily. Thus, I believe that knowledge is not just stored in a persons mind but in any form that is capable of presenting data. Which leads me to my next point, that the application of knowledge or any process of it concerning learning, perception, association and reasoning can be better defined as intelligence. Tacit and explicit knowledge are different -in a very simple sense- by their ease of transference between people and there ability to be written down. From this statement I argue that the quality of transference is where intelligence, "the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills" comes into play (Oxford English Dictionary). Therefore, I believe that the concept of knowledge can be better defined, and its storage explained through a theory involving concepts and definitions from both knowledge and intelligence. ====

====When I think of the word "knowledge", I automatically think of people. I believe knowledge is information plus experience. Unless the information has been tested, processed or thought about in some depth, it cannot be considered knowledge in my mind; it is merely information. When there is some experience involved, then I consider it to be knowledge, because you can really understand it entirely. ==== ====Interesting, Emma! Knowledge, to me, means that at least one person is aware of something to be true to them. I think that truth is a personal experience, and that things and realities are ever-changing for every person. In this respect, knowledge doesn't really exist, except in one own's mind, or in the minds of several individuals. If I know that my dog has cancer and I have brought him to the doctor, and the doctor has said "your dog has cancer." Then, //I think I know something//- that my dog has cancer. If my dog miraculously heals from his cancer and becomes healthy, and I don't realize it, and think he still has cancer, then I have old knowledge (false knowledge....No knowledge). The knowledge is only in my mind, and is that which I think, not that which is reality...In this sense, having knowledge of something is useless, but I think there's more to it. What do you think, Irene? ====

====Hi guys! I think both your answers are great and got me thinking. I agree with you Emma, that knowledge is information plus experience, and that for this reason, as you said Nadine, that knowedge has to reside in the mind(s) of the individual or group. A book on a subject merely contains information or data (the representation of knowedge) - it is only when we've processed that information and recognized (or understood) its validity that it becomes knowledge. I think that knowledge does imply both truth and belief to some extent, but I'm still thinking about exactly how they all interact. You can believe something that is untrue, but you cannot "know" something and say that you do not believe it or that it is untrue. (There are examples on Wikipedia about these types of statements.) ====

====I agree with you Nadine- I think depending on what the topic is, aka what kind of information you're looking at, it will change your perception. When you are looking at an atlas, and studying geography, that "knowledge" is much more matter of fact. You KNOW that these coutries are in that exact location, etc. If you were reading something philosophical or religious, your perception of knowledge would be based much more of the belief side of things. Overall, it comes down to context. What you are reading or studying will affect if you consider something information or knowledge. Just another thought... ==== ==== We seem to agree that knowledge is a personal (or group) experience, and that knowledge is not just data on the pages of a book. Irene, if you have a moment, could you please quote what you mentioned from Wikipedia? I'd love to hear more on that. ====

"When you are looking at an atlas, and studying geography, that "knowledge" is much more matter of fact. You KNOW that these coutries are in that exact location, etc."
==== I agree that looking in an atlas seems to be more 'matter of fact' than belief. With this atlas example, we are are basing the book's information on our belief that the person who wrote the book has a really good understanding of geography. We are believing that what we are seeing is truth, fact, and common knowledge. So, it's possible that the knowledge is false. Is it still knowledge if it's wrong? None of us knows the exact coordinates of the earth's continents...But, we do believe that the people who say they have figured it out have told us what is valid. Even though it is common knowledge, none of us here has calculated it. Therefor, knowledge is belief? ====

====http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology talks about belief and truth in knowledge. Their example is that the statement "I know the sky is blue, but I don't believe it" is self-contradicotry, which shows that knowledge entails belief. (There's a great Venn diagram too but I can't figure out how to copy and paste it.) I'm still trying to find where else I was reading about this. ====

==== Yes, I think the understanding of what knowledge really is, comes down to belief. Its basically any sort of information that you believe to be true. There are definitely some things that I don't factor belief into because they are so matter-of-fact, but for the most part, its whatever you think is real. ====