Knowledge
Definition prologue
I don’t subscribe to the belief that truths can be known absolutely. I believe absolute truth exists, but to enable reason, one cannot claim it. I lay that out as a proof here (LINK).
I see truth in various forms:
- Absolute truth – The creator’s truth. No one can claim to know it, even though a person or group’s truth may be absolute truth. This is how we keep an open mind. Truths that are absolutely true meet the sufficient condition.
- Immutable Truth (Faith) – A type of given truth required to be a member of that faith. These truths are ostensibly absolute truths. That is, this truth will not be subject to revision in the future for faithful that faith. EVER. If the faithful wish to remain rational however, they must respect that they cannot know the creator’s absolute truth. Faith is different from absolute truth. Still, the faithful of a particular faith may be absolutely right. They just can never claim to be absolutely right.
- Objective Truth – A truth shared by ALL the stakeholders of a question. If any stakeholder proffers a conflicting truth, then what everyone else knows is shared subjective truth, even though a near unanimous majority share it. It is a hypothesis. Conflicting opinions are respected in this way so that reasoning (pursuit of truth) is always preserved. The good faith dissenter must always be encouraged/protected. So freedom of conscience is key to reason.
- Laws –Subjectively true beliefs respected, though NOT ACCEPTED, as objectively true. Sometimes it is not practical to get to objective truth (agreement by all affected). For objective truth, only one belief (hypothesis) can remain. Testing ordinarily disproves false hypotheses. However, often it is not possible to all test beliefs without implementing a particular belief or “truth”. Thus for these pseudo-objectively true beliefs, a rigorous justice system must be in place (protected by a document preserving freedom of thought and speech) in order to keep laws rational and just. The individuals respecting (not accepting) these pseudo objective-truths must be empowered to challenge them.
- Subjective truth – Held by an individual or not the entire group. It’s a hypothesis. Ideally the individual (or subset group) has observations to support it (i.e. good faith). When an individual has a hypothesis that explains the observed, they can be said to have a truth or hypothesis that meets the necessary condition. A subjective truth must meet the necessary condition.
Finally, knowledge defined
I see beliefs as subjective truths. Knowledge, from my perspective, is not objective truth however. Knowledge is what one gains as they proceed through the process of establishing objective truth in the pursuit of absolute truth. After all, objective truth is only objective truth until a new conflicting hypothesis comes along, then objective truth once again returns to subjective truth status. However, when one invalidates a hypothesis, you know that that result is absolutely true. That’s knowledge.
An untested subjective truth is fragile. Whereas, you would be right to feel confident in a rigorously tested hypothesis resulting in an objective truth. But you also right to feel great satisfaction in that you have acquired much knowledge (hypotheses you know that are absolutely not true) in the same process.
That’s how I think knowledge and beliefs relate.
