Hey, ive read Shravan's theory of knowledge, and my theory of knowledge ressembles his title. I agree with rathod's comment - there is a thin line between knowledge and infomation, and often the two are blurred. I do agree with Rathod again when he says that knowledge is our perception of 'infomation'. But does that mean that infomation is 'unbiased knowledge'? We often say 'download info from the net' and never knowledge , and use the work 'knowledgable person' and not informative.any thoughts on this?
A random thought i had of knowledge - i do think knowledge ressembles the theory of conservation of energy-knowledge can never be created or destryoed. Knowledge is something vast and abstract, yet something confined to the mind. When i think of knowledge i think of a vastness, like a universe, like clay, which can moulded into any shape and be altered any time. Its impossible to measure and organize it. But everything we need to know is out there- we jsut have to find it. For example, discoveries- why are they called discoveries? Because it was there all along - we just found it out. The entire world is changing, and there are many mysteries in the world which we dont understrand, or claim to understand. Referring back to the analogy of clay, there are many different ways of understanding and approaching knowledge- by reason, or by emotion, by science or literature or art. But theres nothing really new- everything we do is a discovery. in an invention, we discover manipulation. Everyday, in every action, we unknowingly, unwittingly discover something knew. We dont learn- we merely discover things that were out there all along. (this actually supports what mr joshi said about every action culminating in knowledge. a really simple statement but so true)
Ths we dont expand our knowledge when we read a book, we merely discover something that was out there. When they invented the TV, they merely discovered another technique of manipulation. any thoughts on this?
No comments:
Post a Comment