Marsha said to dmb:
It is quite easy to reject intellectually reject our own habits There are
examples all around us; there is self-contradiction and levels of experience:
priests, attorney generals, politicians, etc. When you know it in your bones,
than you have transcended it.
dmb says:
I don't know what you mean. Not even sure what the topic is. Are you talking
about know-how or knowledge by acquaintance or what?
> On May 11, 2010, at 1:49 PM, david buchanan wrote:
>
> >
> > James
> > In 1890, William James, agreeing there were two fundamental kinds of
> > knowledge, and adopting Grote's terminology, further developed the
> > distinctions made by Grote and Helmholtz:I am acquainted with many people
> > and things, which I know very little about, except their presence in the
> > places where I have met them. I know the color blue when I see it, and the
> > flavor of a pear when I taste it; I know an inch when I move my finger
> > through it; a second of time, when I feel it pass; an effort of attention
> > when I make it; a difference between two things when I notice it; but about
> > the inner nature of these facts or what makes them what they are, I can say
> > nothing at all. I cannot impart acquaintance with them to any one who has
> > not already made it himself I cannot describe them, make a blind man guess
> > what blue is like, define to a child a syllogism, or tell a philosopher in
> > just what respect distance is just what it is, and differs from other forms
> > of relation. At most, I can say
t
> o
> > my friends, Go to certain places and act in certain ways, and these objects
> > will probably come. (1890, p.221)
> >
> >
> > Russell
> > According to Russell, knowledge by acquaintance is obtained through a
> > direct causal (experience-based) interaction between a person and the
> > object that person is perceiving. Sense-data from that object are the only
> > things that people can ever become acquainted with; they can never truly
> > KNOW the physical object itself. A person can also be acquainted with his
> > own sense of self (cogito ergo sum) and his thoughts and ideas. However,
> > other people could not become acquainted with another person's mind, for
> > example. They have no way of directly interacting with it, since a mind is
> > an internal object. They can only perceive that a mind could exist by
> > observing that person's behaviour.To be fully justified in believing a
> > proposition to be true one must be acquainted, not only with the fact that
> > supposedly makes the proposition true, but with the relation of
> > correspondence that holds between the proposition and the fact. In other
> > words, justified true belief can only occur if I k
no
> w
> > that a proposition (e.g. "Snow is white") is true in virtue of a fact (e.g.
> > that snow is indeed white). By way of example, John is justified in
> > believing that he is in pain if he is directly and immediately acquainted
> > with his pain. Not if John makes an inference regarding his pain ("I must
> > be in pain because my arm is bleeding"), but feels it as an immediate
> > sensation ("My arm hurts!"). This direct contact with the fact and the
> > knowledge that this fact makes a proposition true is what is meant with
> > knowledge by acquaintance.On the contrary, when one is not directly and
> > immediately acquainted with a fact, such as Julius Caesar's assassination,
> > we speak of knowledge by description. When one is not directly in contact
> > with the fact, but knows it only indirectly by means of a description, one
> > arguably is not entirely justified in holding a proposition true (such as
> > e.g. "Caesar was killed by Brutus").
> >
> >
> >>> Matt:
> >>>> I remember reading a transcript of a lecture Pirsig gave
> >>>> once where (if memory serves) he used Bertrand Russell's
> >>>> distinction between knowledge by appearance and
> >>>> knowledge by description to catch hold of the same thing.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Steve:
> >>> Are you talking about SODV? If not, I don't think I ever read that one.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
> > http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
