How does Bertrand Russell differentiate between “knowledge by acquaintance” and “knowledge by description”? (check out the footnote at bottom of p. 19)
Bertrand Russell describes “knowledge by acquaintance” as raw feeling, that every attitude we have towards something is based off of the experiences we have had with them. It is only a felling that one person knows. Knowledge is description is known but it is not something that is felt, but something that is described in a way that it does not generate raw feelings.
How does Abel distinguish between “knowing how” and “knowing that”?
Abel distinguishes that knowing that is propositional and cannot be explained how one person knows it. Knowing how is evident where you can see someone performing the task. Abel explains that “one may know how to swim, for example, or how to tie a bowtie, without being able to describe exactly how one does these things” (pg. 19) this quote enforces that it is harder to explain how some knows to do something, than actually show that that person knows how to do that task.
What does he mean when he asks: “can knowing how theoretically always be reduced to knowing that? What is Abel’s answer? What do you think?
The meaning that Abel is trying to give about Knowing How being theoretically reduced to Knowing that is that all things that you know how can be explained how one does these things. Abel’s answer for this is that “knowing how to do these things perhaps cannot be fully specified in propositional Knowing that.” I think that Knowing how cannot be reduced to knowing that because certain knowledge cannot be explained how one knows how to do it, such as muscle movement. Someone knows how to move there fingers, but does not know how to describe to another how he knows.
How does language become a problem of knowledge?
Language becomes a problem with knowledge because it can be translated differently and be meanings ad terms can be lost in translation from one language to another.
What do you think William James means when he says: “Life defies our phrases?”
when William James says “life defies our phrases,” I think that he means that there are no phrases that we know that applies to our lives. These phrases are created from the experience of one person and then it is applied to someone’s life by the person in the same situation. However, the person who applies the phrase does it because it feels like it matches the situation whereas it actually it does not.
What, according to Abel, is the difference between “experience” and “propositional knowledge”?
The difference between “experience” and “propositional knowledge” is that experience applies to one person only. One person cannot describe how pie smells to them because it is something that is known through one’s own personal view and that is it. However, propositional knowledge is that believed and knows by everyone as fact. It is not personalized and experienced by one person but it is known to all people without feelings and senses intertwined into it.
What are Abel’s Four Conditions for propositional knowledge? Where have we seen this before? Why does he add a Fourth Condition?
Abel’s four conditions for propositional knowledge are:
· Something needs to be true to be known
· Belief is a necessary condition for knowledge, but not a sufficient one.
· Evidence is a necessary but not a sufficient component for knowledge.
· There is now evidence to undermine a belief.
Theses conditions are the exact same thing for platonic knowledge.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment