It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by tridentblue
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
The lance which Santa Claus holds when he rides his lucky unicorn is something I can describe in great detail. In my minds eye, I am zooming in to the place where it flares out protectively, in a bell shape, the grip coming from the inside of the bell. On this part of the lance, there is a silver coating, decorated with mistletoe inlays. Very pretty.
Of course it doesn't exist outside of my mind. So is that knowledge? Sure it is.
The hard question for me is ontology, what is true knowledge, what does that mean. True knowledge has a consistency with experience, that's all I can say about it.
Anyway, those are my two cents on this thread.
Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
Originally posted by tridentblue
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
The lance which Santa Claus holds when he rides his lucky unicorn is something I can describe in great detail. In my minds eye, I am zooming in to the place where it flares out protectively, in a bell shape, the grip coming from the inside of the bell. On this part of the lance, there is a silver coating, decorated with mistletoe inlays. Very pretty. (snip)
(snip)
I personally don't believe "true knowledge" exists, minus a few exceptions such as mathematics(which, whether or not is considered "knowledge" is a whole different story) but....as for observational "true knowledge" and the like....it would require an absolute set of data...which we could never possibly acquire...That is to say, if were to say that the Sun "rises" in the east and "sets" in the west, we would need an absolute set of data, or in other words, we would have to observe the Sun for an infinite amount of time......
A2D
Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
Then I invite you to start a thread. If you choose not to, and also choose to terminate this discussion, I will respect that. In closing however, I would like to point out that you are the one who claimed that your belief constitutes as knowledge, or serves as a precursor to such inevitable knowledge. This was in response to my questioning your credibility in making any sort of authoritative statement regarding cosmic powers and their responsibilities. If I misunderstood your claims, then I apologize.edit on 4-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)
Yes, I know what has been said However I did not state I was an expert! I simply stated that beliefs are derived from knowledge....now what knowledge actually IS, is a completely different topic....Hence the new thread....and why I think we may have a misunderstanding and ultimately come to disagreement.....
What constitutes "knowledge"?
What constitutes a "belief"?
How do we obtain "knowledge" and would that be a priori or a posteriori?
Is "knowledge" even possible?
Can "knowledge" be certain?
Can "belief" be derived from "knowledge"?
and finally
What is the criteria for "reasonable belief"?
The researchers were able to demonstrate that small clusters of pyramidal neurons in the neocortex interconnect according to a set of immutable and relatively simple rules.......
These clusters contain an estimated fifty neurons, on average. The scientists look at them as essential building blocks, which contain in themselves a kind of fundamental, innate knowledge – for example, representations of certain simple workings of the physical world. Acquired knowledge, such as memory, would involve combining these elementary building blocks at a higher level of the system. “This could explain why we all share similar perceptions of physical reality, while our memories reflect our individual experience”, explains Markram.
Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
Knowledge is that which is held to be true without speculation or interpretation.
knowledge is determined through repeatable self inclusive processes which eliminates assumption and external influence or interpretation which compromises the objective value of the results found therein.
the above definitions are a rough estimate of my understanding.
Not all beliefs are derived from knowledge. But what knowledge are your beliefs derived from, and how do you come by this knowledge?