[MD] What is knowledge?

[David Harding]

Hi SA and Marsha,

I hope you both don't mind but I'm going to chime in on your side  
conversation here as I think it has bearing on Marsha and my  
conversation on what knowledge is.  As Marsha and I have already  
conversed on this issue I'm going to comment on SA's comments only.


>      [Marsha]
>> You tell me what YOU think.
>> For me in the beginning is value/experience.  Other
>> than an unrelenting curiosity, I'm not sure I need
> to know
>> exactly which patterns go in which levels.
> [SA wrote]
>     This is why I don't think we can restrict
> something like knowledge or reality upon any one
> level.

Knowledge is but one aspect of reality. In my view reality is value,  
knowledge is intellectual patterns of value.

[SA again]
> That would exclude a level that has been able
> to be known.  Known by valuing.  Being alert to how
> atoms rove is to understand that's a bird flying by.

Both of these two things you mention here are intellectual.

> The levels help distinct a certain aspect of a bird.
> The inorganic level of the bird or the organic level
> of a bird.  This line of thinking may open the door to
> definition of any kind being intellectual, thus, what
> is definition?  Abstract thought is the intellectual
> level, and humans experience this level, but since we
> experience this level does that mean we connect with
> an intellectual level of values that are everywhere?

I'm not sure what you mean by 'connect' however the MoQ is  
intellectual patterns describing values that are everywhere.

>
>      [Marsha]
>> Well, I would like to be able to understand and
> explain this new MOQ > worldview, but I mostly paint.
> The people around me don't want to > talk about
> metaphysical matters or philosophy which is
> frustrating.   > It just seems to me, if all is SPOVs:
> thoughts, trees, atoms, rocks,
>> geometry, dogs, water, philosophy are patterns, then
> these patterns > should not be described as material
> objects with value attached.
>> Everything I see, hear, taste, touch, smell & think
> is value/experience > and may become or intersect with
> SPOVs.
>

[SA wrote]
>      Yes, I agree.  These SPOVs are experience.  An
> experience that is quality.  Therefore this experience
> is not solely me, this human being, but an experience
> upon four levels.  For instance, as a human being I'm
> able to experience inorganic to intellectual levels.
> What is the experience like on the inorganic level?
> Maybe that question is answered on the organic level,
> social and intellectual levels.

I can say intellectually that it would be an experience of very  
little freedom and if you really want to experience it you can kill  
yourself.

[SA]
> The inorganic level
> experience that emerges upon the organic level is an
> organic level experience of what the inorganic level
> is like.

According to the MOQ the organic level emerges from the inorganic level.

>
>      [Marsha]
>> No you tell me how you would define knowledge.  Is
> it patterns of
>> abstract symbol manipulation only, or might it be
> patterns like
>> knowing you mother's name too.  That's social
> custom, but isn't a
>> name also a symbol for something else (mother).  I
> don't know for
>> sure.
> [SA]
>     Knowledge is social and intellectual here in your
> example, I agree.

As I've said before knowledge is a set of intellectual patterns of  
value.  SA, if you look at an earlier post of mine to Marsha under  
this subject you see why I say knowledge is on the intellectual level  
only.

>
>      [Marsha]
>> Epistemology deals with 'what we know' and 'how we
> know
>> it'.
> [SA]
>     We know all levels, and all levels are how we
> know.  Static patterns are the reflective aspect of
> dq.  Static patterns is dq awakened.  SPOV are dq
> knowing itself.

My definition of Epistemology according to the E/O thread:

"Thus, the MOQ perspective is that epistemologically, quality is the  
source of Intellectual patterns of value."

>
>      [Marsha]
>> Is knowing how to bake a pie knowing something?
> [SA]
>      Yes.

If the baking has been acquired purely on the social level then no 
(unlikely), if it has an intellectual component then yes.

>
>      [Marsha]
>> If it's not knowing, what is it?  Is knowing that a
> pie falls into the
>> category of desserts knowing?   You're asking me for
> information
>> that I'm asking about?
>
> [SA]
>      To locate 'knowledge' or 'where knowing exists'
> is answered as: value.

'where knowing exists' is on the intellectual level.

[SA]
> To mystic base this answer
> would be to say that any reality of knowledge is wrong
> to discuss, talk about and thus think (subject based)
> the MOQ debunks. To logical positivist base this
> answer would be to say knowledge is based in objects,
> and the MOQ debunks this too.

I agree.

Cheers,

David.