ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
*****************************************************************************
I think as individuals we may use different ways of knowing. Jonah mentioned
that he knows "that the
greatest living human being is Jerome Bettis." I don't know that (in fact I
haven't a clue who he is ;)) and I suspect most of the other people on this
list don't know that either. In "fact", I happen to know that my dad is the
greatest living human being.
I know that Bruegel's "The Beekeepers" is an excellent work of art. Some
other people don't know that. I know that Nietzsche didn't literally believe
in "eternal recurrence" but others claim they know he did.
I look at none of these examples as knowledge. I look at them as individual
beliefs.
I have always thought of knowledge as universal. A piece of knowledge, such
as evolution, is available to be understood by all, experimented with and
tested as a theory, by all. The knowledge can be accessed and reproduced by
any individual. (Not many individuals bother, of course, but nevertheless..
they could if they wanted to.)
In my opinion scientific methodologies (or aspects of the scientific method)
go back to the earliest human and perhaps further. To survive, humans had to
observe their environment, take note of patterns, find the basic necessities
of life. They tried to explain things and though they may have got it wrong,
they used the information available to them at the time. How could this "way
of knowing" be explained otherwise? Even the "paranormal" ideas of the past
would have been arrived at in a similar manner if they were basing their
ideas on observation and the information available to them. It may not be
science as we know it but the basis for ideas such as alchemy, life after
death, etc., were based on experience and the current understanding of
reality. For instance, I have always thought that the first belief in life
after death may have been associated with dreams. A human may see a dead
friend in a dream and not understand how the deceased is still "alive". The
only explanation available at the time may have been that the deceased is
still alive in some manner. This also may explain why these early humans
would place gifts in the burial site - so that when the deceased did come
back and "visit" they would be kind instead of mean. These early inquiries
led to the vast knowledge and understanding we have today. Because we have
managed to progress in our knowledge, however, a belief in alchemy (the lead
turning into gold claim, at least) would no longer constitute knowledge. It
may have been valid in 5000 BCE but it isn't in 2006 CE. Life after death is
a bit of a different claim. Noone can "know" if life continues after death
but we would no longer consider dreams as a piece of evidence for the idea
and based on our understanding of biology, some people do have reason and a
scientific basis to state that it's unlikely.
There was also a time when philosophy and science were synonymous. Natural
philosophy and several of the non-metaphysical kinds from earlier times,
could still be shown to use the same methodologies as science. In this way,
the fruits of their labor would be considered knowledge as well.
It is my opinion then that science is our only way of knowing as a
collective species and the tools of science; skepticism, critical inquiry,
experimentation, etc., are our only reliable guides in decisions, action,
behavior and the other ways we interact (and are a part of) reality as we
know it - both as individuals and as a species.
Amanda
***
Amanda Chesworth, Educational Director
Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal
www.csicop.org
Inquiring Minds Program
www.inquiringminds.org
Skeptical Inquirer Magazine
www.skepticalinquirer.org
Skeptiseum
www.skeptiseum.org
Skeptic's Toolbox
www.skepticstoolbox.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leonard Adams" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: Different ways of knowing?
> ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
> Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related
institutions.
>
****************************************************************************
*
>
> It almost sounds as though the sentiment here is that we only know the
> 'real' world through science...
>
> ===========================
> As an aside, when I hear the phrase "different ways of knowing" I think
> of
> political correctness. Though I agree that art and philosophy afford
> us
> different perspectives on thinking and add great value to our lives, I
> don't
> think they are comparable to the knowledge we have built based on
> science
> and I think it just serves to confuse the issue by claiming these are
> all,
> equal ways, of attaining knowledge about our world.
> ===========================
>
> Though you could argue that inquisitiveness has been around in humans
> for practically forever, science, per se, hasn't. How long has science
> been around? Depending on how strict a definition you adhere to you
> might say several hundred, or perhaps several thousand years. How did
> we obtain knowledge about our world before science? Were those
> perceptions of reality valid? It seems to me that our perceptions of
> the world during the period before science were valid enough to keep our
> species viable. This, I think, is what some folks refer to when they
> talk about different ways of knowing.
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Len
>
> Len Adams
> Health Promotion Specialist
> Tacoma-Pierce County Health Dept.
> 3629 South D Street, MS:319
> Tacoma, WA 98418-6813
> 253/798-6129
>
>
> "Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
> Genius hits a target no one else can see."
>
> - Arthur Schopenhauer
>
> ***********************************************************************
> More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
> Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at
http://www.astc.org.
> To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
> message SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
> [log in to unmask]
>
***********************************************************************
More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at http://www.astc.org.
To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]
|
