Excellent. Another source of knowledge as defined involves logical extensions to the narratives we construct for ourselves of the world and the way it works. These narratives are probably built from the core blocks you describe, plus an element of imagination which weaves things together into our personal 'logic' structure. I also wonder our knowledge is also conditioned by its acceptability to others. This is a variation of trusting others and involves the pragmatism you identify.
This seems to be heading into the 'tolerance boundary' territory we have discussed before. Individual knowledge sits within a tolerance boundary that is societally determined. Those whose knowledge sits outside this boundary are geniuses, fools or insane.
Good point. The 'logical extensions' are very important. They could fall under the things we figure out for ourselves, but the process is often not conscious. Also, for simplicity, I have played down the plural (theory bound) nature of knowledge that I have emphasised elsewhere - which means we accept knowledge as structures and theories rather than individual statements. I'll think about how best to cover this.
And yes, societal aspects are very important - partly for the reasons in the post following this one. Much more to say on the societal aspects but I need to build the foundations first.
And on your final point, some are probably all three: genius, fool and insane! ;)
Excellent. Another source of knowledge as defined involves logical extensions to the narratives we construct for ourselves of the world and the way it works. These narratives are probably built from the core blocks you describe, plus an element of imagination which weaves things together into our personal 'logic' structure. I also wonder our knowledge is also conditioned by its acceptability to others. This is a variation of trusting others and involves the pragmatism you identify.
This seems to be heading into the 'tolerance boundary' territory we have discussed before. Individual knowledge sits within a tolerance boundary that is societally determined. Those whose knowledge sits outside this boundary are geniuses, fools or insane.
Good point. The 'logical extensions' are very important. They could fall under the things we figure out for ourselves, but the process is often not conscious. Also, for simplicity, I have played down the plural (theory bound) nature of knowledge that I have emphasised elsewhere - which means we accept knowledge as structures and theories rather than individual statements. I'll think about how best to cover this.
And yes, societal aspects are very important - partly for the reasons in the post following this one. Much more to say on the societal aspects but I need to build the foundations first.
And on your final point, some are probably all three: genius, fool and insane! ;)