Is there knowledge without a knower?

[YoursTrue]

Does knowledge exist without someone knowing it though?

Schrödinger’s Cat.

Perhaps it exists and doesn’t at the same time until it is known.

haha that's funny.

 

[YoursTrue]

No. There must be someone/something around that is capable of knowing in order for there to be knowledge.

This is a less troublesome version of "if a tree falls in the forest, with no one around to hear it, did it make a sound?"

right. That's about when I stopped reading Alan Watts.

 

[Eddi]

I'm tempted to ask (but I won't) how you know this.

I qualified my post

I began with "I think" - which is different to claiming to know. I was clearly only providing my own opinion

Why is that my opinion would be the better question

 

[YoursTrue]

I qualified my post

I began with "I think" - which is different to claiming to know. I was clearly only providing my own opinion

Why is that my opinion would be the better question

Yes, I suppose. (But I won't ask...) It's out of boundaries for me. Kind of like e=mc2.

 

[Eddi]

Yes, I suppose. (But I won't ask...) It's out of boundaries for me. Kind of like e=mc2.

Boundaries are important.

 

[Nakosis]

Well, that is for another thread. You can start one and tag me if you want to. You have my permission and if the moderators ask, tell them to ask me.

Colloquially, 'knowledge' and 'information' are interchangeable. However, no, that is not very precise so it seems most people think like you.

 

[YoursTrue]

Boundaries are important.

Yes, there are some things that are -- beyond me. Now IF Einstein were around and I could ask him whatever did he mean by that, and he explained it to me and I could understand his explanation, that would change things I suppose. But maybe I wouldn't agree with him anyway.

 

[We Never Know]

If not, then there is someone who knows everything.

Knowledge may be discovered or yet to be found.

By definition it isn't knowledge until its known.

 

[Twilight Hue]

If not, then there is someone who knows everything.

Knowledge may be discovered or yet to be found.

There's information out there, knowing that information is the challenge, and is only useful if we know ourselves with a provisional trust with those who know more than another person due to complexity requiring advanced education.

 

[We Never Know]

There's information out there, knowing that information is the challenge, and is only useful if we know ourselves with a provisional trust with those who know more than another person due to complexity requiring advanced education.

Knowing that information is knowledge.
If its unknown, it isn't knowledge

 

[SalixIncendium]

You are close to the theists who say there cannot be an intelligent universe without the grand intelligence. Science discounts this view.
There is 'physical energy' and its properties (which may include non-existence - Ex-nihilo, Zero energy universe), but there is no 'knower' as such.

I can see where you arrive at that conclusion based on what I said. That's primarily because you took one sentence from what I said out of context.

Please allow me to clarify. Experience does not exist in the absence of an experiencer. There is nothing that contains experiences in the experiencer's absence. There is no keeper of experiences. The same can be said for knowledge.

 

[HonestJoe]

If not, then there is someone who knows everything.

Knowledge may be discovered or yet to be found.

That's as much a semantic question as a philosophical one. If you take a strict definition of the word knowledge, it would only involve information currently held by sentient beings ("knowers" if you like). That doesn't mean that information can't exist outside the existence of a "knower", such as recorded in some way or in abstract (like the contents of a sealed box). In some contexts, people might call some or all of that information "knowledge" even though there isn't any "knower" (currently) holding it.

Either way, none of this would mean that all information needs to have a "knower" and certainly not that all information needs to be held by a single individual.