|
Kurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: sudly]
#24053488 - 01/31/17 02:44 AM (7 years, 26 minutes ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Explicit knowledge = The atomic number of carbon is 6. Implicit knowledge = I think the atomic number of carbon is 7.
Why are you calling a false belief "knowledge"? I don't care why you justify it in your head or on the internet, this is bullshit.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: Kurt]
#24053525 - 01/31/17 03:48 AM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I think we come to our knowledge through experience, but that the experience we have may be different.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Kurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: sudly]
#24053544 - 01/31/17 04:26 AM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Dude quit dumping your narcissistic internet-memes here, and start following the rules of the forum. This is a debate forum. There is a burden of argument, particularly when you make knowledge claims.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: Kurt]
#24053552 - 01/31/17 04:49 AM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kurt said: Why are you calling a false belief "knowledge"? I don't care why you justify it in your head or on the internet, this is bullshit.
I was simply stating there are explicit tendencies and implicit perceptions.
Quote:
Kurt said: Dude quit dumping your narcissistic internet-memes here, and start following the rules of the forum. This is a debate forum. There is a burden of argument, particularly when you make knowledge claims.
They're explanatory memes..
If there's a burden of argument then perhaps you could add to it instead of simply calling bullshit on the things you disagree with or don't understand.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Kurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: sudly]
#24057789 - 02/01/17 04:47 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
You said there is such thing as "implicit knowledge".
You also said an example of implicit knowledge is a false statement, the case when you "think the atomic number of carbon is 7".
How do you justify your false belief as knowledge?
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: Kurt]
#24057855 - 02/01/17 05:08 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Implicit knowledge is thinking you're right. Explicit knowledge is knowing you're right.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Kurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: sudly]
#24057896 - 02/01/17 05:20 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
That is clearly wrong, sudly.
Thinking you are right is not any sort of knowledge.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: Kurt]
#24057909 - 02/01/17 05:24 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Knowledge: facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject.
Sometimes people get their facts wrong.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
xzylocybin
Stranger



Registered: 06/10/12
Posts: 2,304
Last seen: 5 years, 10 months
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: sudly]
#24057926 - 02/01/17 05:29 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I found your presentation on ostention to be ostentatious.
Thank you for your post my brain needed a little philosophic intellectualism after all this political bs I have been saturated in lately.
|
Kurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: sudly]
#24057960 - 02/01/17 05:36 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said: Implicit knowledge is thinking you're right. Explicit knowledge is knowing you're right.
Quote:
Kurt said: That is clearly wrong, sudly.
Thinking you are right is not any sort of knowledge.
Quote:
sudly said:
Quote:
Knowledge: facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject.
Sometimes people get their facts wrong.
What is your point? Stick to expressed arguments.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: Kurt]
#24057969 - 02/01/17 05:39 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sometimes people get their facts wrong.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Kurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: xzylocybin]
#24058055 - 02/01/17 06:14 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
You are going to have to express whatever logic you are suggesting or "implying". What's your point? I don't see one.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: Kurt]
#24058076 - 02/01/17 06:21 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
If you still don't know the difference between the terms explicit and implicit then perhaps it can't be helped.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: sudly]
#24058119 - 02/01/17 06:35 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said: Implicit knowledge is thinking you're right. Explicit knowledge is knowing you're right.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems ridiculous. Thinking one is right doesn't matter for shit, and knowing one is right is impossible. Even science doesn't "know it's right"; it builds models which most suitably match experiment.
It's nonsense.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
|
|
I think it's true that thinking one is right doesn't matter in the big scheme of things, but that we can know if something is right because explicit tendencies occur and are true irrelevant of individual thought.
Quote:
Explicit knowledge = The atomic number of carbon is 6. Implicit knowledge = I think the atomic number of carbon is 7.
Correct me if you think I'm wrong, but as I see it there is true knowledge(explicit) and opinion(implicit).
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: sudly]
#24058193 - 02/01/17 06:57 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I think the question is whether a human can have a one to one correspondence with objective reality, and while most people would probably say that such a thing is impossible, I agree with you that it is possible. However, I fail to see the advantage in using the terminology you use. But whatever floats your boat.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
|
|
For me the terminology of explicit and implicit provides a simple explanation of the concept of dualism in reference to mind and body.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Kurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Quote:
sudly said: Implicit knowledge is thinking you're right. Explicit knowledge is knowing you're right.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems ridiculous. Thinking one is right doesn't matter for shit, and knowing one is right is impossible. Even science doesn't "know it's right"; it builds models which most suitably match experiment.
It's nonsense.
Thank you! Whether we can really know anything, or whether can look away from knowing, belief and conceptual structure will probably always be a philosophical question with different points of view.
But this shouldn't distract from the aggresive arguments he has made which can be brought to consideration. Sudly calling "thinking you are right" (eg. opinion, false beliefs etc) "knowledge" is wrong by any account. No need to qualify the statement in this case.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,812
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: Kurt]
#24058947 - 02/01/17 10:56 PM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kurt said: Sudly calling "thinking you are right" (eg. opinion, false beliefs etc) "knowledge" is wrong by any account. No need to qualify the statement in this case.
Since knowledge is information acquired through experience or education, it makes sense to me that some people are not as informed as others and that what they perceive as their knowledge can infact be false, hence why it can be called implicit knowledge.
If you don't like the word implicit, it's also known as tacit knowledge which may offer a better explanation/point of view.
Quote:
Tacit knowledge: Unwritten, unspoken, and hidden vast storehouse of knowledge held by practically every normal human being, based on his or her emotions, experiences, insights, intuition, observations and internalized information. Tacit knowledge is integral to the entirety of a person's consciousness, is acquired largely through association with other people, and requires joint or shared activities to be imparted from on to another. Like the submerged part of an iceberg it constitutes the bulk of what one knows, and forms the underlying framework that makes explicit knowledge possible.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Kurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
|
Re: Linguistic Philosophy [Re: sudly]
#24059247 - 02/02/17 02:56 AM (6 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
That is too general. You need to speak for yourself, in your own terms, rather than for people you politically advocate who are scientifically educated.
|
|