Is knowledge real?

[Cooky]

As humans, it is a natural instinct to gain knowledge about everything we can, but is this ability an actual concept in the universe? Is it some kind of an abstraction of something common in space like gold deposits would be common -- so would knowledge be common in another life form somewhere else?

If it is common, then could it exist outside of life forms?

 

[Onoma]

I've oft heard that mathematics would likely be a universal language

 

[Cooky]

I've oft heard that mathematics would likely be a universal language

It seems strange that mathematics exist, since it has no practical use in the universe aside from our discovering and making use of it that I know of.

 

[Onoma]

It seems strange that mathematics exist, since it has no practical use in the universe aside from our discovering and making use of it that I know of.

If it had no practical use why would we make use of it to begin with ?

 

[Cooky]

If it had no practical use why would we make use of it to begin with ?

I mean aside from our understanding of it, mathematics as a 'thing' might not even be real. How can we be sure that it's not a coincidental abstraction of human thought that doesn't even actually exist in nature?

...After all, mathematics isn't 'used' at all... Anywhere... Ever... Aside from our minds.

 

[Onoma]

I mean aside from our understanding of it, mathematics as a 'thing' might not even be real. How can we be sure that it's not a coincidental abstraction of human thought that doesn't even actually exist in nature?

...After all, mathematics isn't 'used' at all... Anywhere... Ever... Aside from our minds.

What about natural units that are based on physical constants ?

 

[Cooky]

What about natural units that are based on physical constants ?

Right, but those units aren't aware of, and have no need for mathematics. They just are what they are, where as us humans can actually grasp the concept of units, measures and mathematics as a whole, and make use of it.

So is it our concept alone..? Where the universe just is what it is, and mathematics exists only in our minds? Perhaps an alien life were able to comprehend it, then does it belong to the living..? Exclusively..? And not the non-living?

 

[Cooky]

Perhaps as living creatures, we *are* knowledge... Perhaps we're like hyper-compressed knowledge crystals.. Like diamonds of knowledge.

...In which case, knowledge would be a real thing. And we are it.

 

[Onoma]

Right, but those units aren't aware of, and have no need for mathematics. They just are what they are, where as us humans can actually grasp the concept of units, measures and mathematics as a whole, and make use of it.

So is it our concept alone..? Where the universe just is what it is, and mathematics exists only in our minds? Perhaps an alien life were able to comprehend it, then does it belong to the living..? Exclusively..? And not the non-living?

Hmm, that's why I brought up natural units, they, along with mathematical constants are what are conjectured to be universal

 

[Cooky]

But what's odd, is that with science, one might argue that knowledge is not actually real, being instead, neurons transmitting information throughout the frontal cortex, through mutational processes, taking form after ages in time.

...So is there room in the reductionist world of science for "knowledge" to be an actual thing that exists outside of the mechanics of the body?

 

[Cooky]

...Or am I trippin'..?

 

[Onoma]

Guess it depends on what you are referring to when you invoke reductionism, it doesn't seem to be something that has a singular or universal meaning like a mathematical constant

 

[Cooky]

Guess it depends on what you are referring to when you invoke reductionism, it doesn't seem to be something that has a singular or universal meaning like a mathematical constant

By reductionism, I mean the specific idea in science that if we look at the smaller parts of a problem, then by digging deeper into the even smaller parts, and eventually finding the smallest parts, like with a microscope, we can eventually see point for point, neuron to neuron transmissions, as opposed to 'big picture' ideas such as seen in philosophy.

This is why the topic of "knowledge" as a concept is practical in philosophy, while the methods found in scientific reductionism on the other hand, seem to be like using an allen wrench where a protractor is needed.

None the less, aside from our tools at hand, the question still stands. Is knowledge something or is it a neural process?

 

[Onoma]

By reductionism, I mean the specific idea in science that if we look at the smaller parts of a problem, then by digging deeper into the even smaller parts, and eventually finding the smallest parts,, like with a microscope, we can eventually see point for point, neuron to neuron transmissions, as opposed to 'big picture' ideas such as found in philosophy.

So then what they call " Methodological reductionism " ?

Well, maybe I'm misunderstanding the terms you are using, but reality isn't generally considered discrete or point-like in nature at smaller scales, ( Particles are not point-like objects, for example ),so " seeing " the minutiae isn't " seeing " like we see objects that are described with Newtonian mechanics, it's ( generally ) seen as probabilistic instead ( This depends on your interpretation of QM ) This is generally where physics is divided by what's known as the Correspondence Principle

And as far as measuring such things, your precision in measurement depends entirely on the units you use

 

[Cooky]

So then what they call " Methodological reductionism " ?

Well, maybe I'm misunderstanding the terms you are using, but reality isn't generally considered discrete or point-like in nature at smaller scales, ( Particles are not point-like objects, for example ),so " seeing " the minutiae isn't " seeing " like we see objects that are described with Newtonian mechanics, it's ( generally ) seen as probabilistic instead ( This depends on your interpretation of QM ) This is generally where physics is divided by what's known as the Correspondence Principle

And as far as measuring such things, your precision in measurement depends entirely on the units you use

I'll need to study the Correspondence Principle before continuing. Thanks for the information.

 

[tayla]

As humans, it is a natural instinct to gain knowledge about everything we can, but is this ability an actual concept in the universe? Is it some kind of an abstraction of something common in space like gold deposits would be common -- so would knowledge be common in another life form somewhere else?

If it is common, then could it exist outside of life forms?

I doubt it's possible to know anything about the essence of what knowledge and truth are outside of our conscious and mindful understanding of these. And this requires a human brain.

Certainly the universe provides for the possibility of consciousness and its contents, and of mind.

 

[sun rise]

It seems strange that mathematics exist, since it has no practical use in the universe aside from our discovering and making use of it that I know of.

No practical use? We use it to aim artillery shells. We use it to calculate when to set an alarm clock. We use it to decide how many mpg cars get. I could go on almost indefinitely.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Is it some kind of an abstraction of something common in space like gold deposits would be common -- so would knowledge be common in another life form somewhere else?
If it is common, then could it exist outside of life forms?

I will need to consult an alien for that. Kindly wait till my call gets through.

 

[Spirit of Light]

As humans, it is a natural instinct to gain knowledge about everything we can, but is this ability an actual concept in the universe? Is it some kind of an abstraction of something common in space like gold deposits would be common -- so would knowledge be common in another life form somewhere else?

If it is common, then could it exist outside of life forms?

I think what you looking for is wisdom, not knowledge

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Is knowledge real?

The word "real" is not real, because it is an idea in your mind and it has no objective referent. It is no different than "god". You can believe in it, but you don't have to.