• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is knowledge derived solely from reason?

Which more closely matches your view of knowledge?

  • Articulated rationality of the cultivated individual

    Votes: 3 75.0%

  • Systemic, but unarticulated, knowledge found in society's institutions.

    Votes: 1 25.0%
  • Total voters
    4
reefedjib

reefedjib

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
6,762
Reaction score
1,619
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Is knowledge derived solely from reasoning about something as an individual, as an articulated rationality, or is the systematic, institutional and traditional sources of knowledge like family, church, youth groups, military, civil service, government that represent non-individual collective knowledge?

Also implicit in the unconstrained vision is the view that the relevant comparison is between the beliefs of one sort of person and another - between x and y, rather than between (1) systemic processes working through successive generations of individuals a through x, as expressed through the living generation x, versus (2) the articulated rationality of y in isolation. The rejection of the concept of collective wisdom leaves individual comparisons as the standard of judgement. Since the experiences of a through w no longer count, the issue reduces to the articulated rationality of x versus that of y. Therefore, the unconstrained vision necessarily favors the "cultivated mind" y, while the constrained vision necessarily favors the views expressed through x, seen as representative of the unarticulated experience of many others (a through w). The two visions thus lead to opposite conclusions as to which opinion should prevail and why.
Click to expand...

A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles
 
Last edited:
reefedjib said:
Is knowledge derived solely from reasoning about something as an individual, as an articulated rationality, or is the systematic, institutional and traditional sources of knowledge like family, church, youth groups, military, civil service, government that represent non-individual collective knowledge?
Click to expand...
False dichotomy - the answer is "both".
 
As for the poll, I am both and I cannot tell which one I am more of. I think it depends on the situation and I am not smart enough to consider all situations at once.

As for the question in the title. I think the answer is no.

Knowledge is hinted at through reason, but unless that knowledge can be verified through evidence, it remains philosophy (a fancy word for speculation).
 
megaprogman said:
As for the poll, I am both and I cannot tell which one I am more of. I think it depends on the situation and I am not smart enough to consider all situations at once.

As for the question in the title. I think the answer is no.

Knowledge is hinted at through reason, but unless that knowledge can be verified through evidence, it remains philosophy (a fancy word for speculation).
Click to expand...

I suppose the real question is whether this makes sense: "the relevant comparison is between the beliefs of one sort of person and another - between x and y, rather than between systemic processes working through successive generations of individuals a through x, as expressed through the living generation x"?

The question is the knowledge within systematic processes working through successive generations is the alternative to purely rational reasoning and knowledge of an individual? Is there knowledge stored in social structures because one man alone is incapable of being an expert in all areas? So it is a collective knowledge.
 
Considering how much a person learns in school, and how schools at least attempt to explain the reasoning behind the knowledge they are giving you, I'd imagine the smarter you become, the more reason based you are. Consequently, the dumber you are, the more dependant on knowledge you end up being.
 
I don't get how these two particular options were formulated but they are not the be all and end all of epistemology.

Everything you think, do, and experience is where your knowledge comes from. Calling knowledge "reason" only is just... unreasonable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom