ways of knowing

[Goblin]

i was pondering on this.

the lowest form of knowing is blind faith. it doesnt need any evidence or reason to be beleived, someone just told you.

the next up is actual experience of phenomena, because perception can be deceiving.

the next up from that is reason, we can make an educated guess or assumption, based on logic and reason.

the highest is proven phenomena; knowing that can be proven with tests that can be repeated time and time again to assure that they are not a fluke.

for example i know there are many elements(they have a table full of'em) they have proven this time and time again. but we havent yet found the truth behind all the elements, so by reason and logic i can posit monism, that all the elements are variants of one primal energy.
i have experienced shapeshifting with shamanistic techniques, but other people see me and say i was like an animal but i didnt actually shapeshift, which means this phenomena was only local to my finite perception, but that was my experience.
but myself and others are amazed by the ridiculous stuff that people will believe just because people tell them; the tooth fairy for example. all because of blind faith.

 

[lovemuffin]

I think you're really only describing one "way" of knowing there, which is via an epistemological process following the evidence of the senses mediated by the reasoning mind. The four categories presented amounting to classifications of propositions based on how justified they are according to this way of knowing.

The reason I'd make this point is that, presumably, you're categorizing as "blind faith" an entire swath of human experiences where traditionally those that hold them to be real don't think of them in these epistemological terms, but as an entirely separate way of knowing: the way of knowing by participating in or becoming the known. In some mystical traditions, this is what is meant by "love", or the mysticism of the lover and the beloved.

 

[mainliner]

What about a lie detector test on someone's believes of knowing what they think or do know ?

 

[Jumi]

Lie detectors don't work that well. Some people can fool them and then people can believe they are right who aren't.

 

[miodrag]

the lowest form of knowing is blind faith

My first reaction is that lowest form of knowledge is a mere perception, without understanding. You know that something is there, but you don't know what exactly that is, dont't see the context in which that fits and don't know how to relate to it. As you see, knowledge can not be separated from intelligence, furthermore - from emotional intelligence. High IQ people may be experts in some filed, geniuses, but at the same time also a sociopaths and "evil geniuses". Without EQ (Emotional intelligence Quotient) their IQ is not enough to understand and address world properly.

Since this is a religious forum, the following must be noted: in religion, the highest form of knowledge is dogma. Today dogma has a pejorative meaning, like a blind faith without critical thinking. But originally, dogma has an exalted meaning, as the truth of the highest rank. According to the method of being acquired, knowledge may be categorized in two groups: ascending and descending. Ascending is gained by our efforts, like science and descending is revealed by a higher authority, by someone who already has the knowledge we miss. Dogma is important because it is a descending knowledge about matters that will always be outside our reach, due to our conditioned position.

Regarding experiments as a standard for accuracy, it goes only this far, as long as we share the common system of reference. Eating a man is a successful experiment with a pleasing outcome for a tiger, not so for the man. Experiments that involves time dilation may give different outcome if were considered from two different systems of reference, speeding away from each other at the speed of light. So, there is always a relationship (remember the EQ) involved with the knowledge. More on experiment, from Hindu perspective, there are two categories given: jnana (knowledge) and vijnana (realization). Jnana means there is an information, vijnana means that knowledge can be also practically applied (experiment). Famous example is Ananda, a follower of Buddha, who is said to have all the knowledge of buddhahood, but failed to became enlightened nevertheless.

 

[Robert Landbeck]

"the highest is proven phenomena; knowing that can be proven with tests that can be repeated time and time again to assure that they are not a fluke."

And the first religious conception that conforms to such criteria is now undergoing trials which are open to all. And the results could very well change the nature of what it means to be human! Quoting from review material on the web:

"Radically different from anything known from history, this new teaching is predicated upon the 'Promise' [Word] of a precise, predefined, predictable and repeatable experience in which the reality of God responds directly to an act of 'perfect faith' with a direct, individual intervention into the natural world, 'raising' up within a man a newly Enlightened heart, realigning his moral compass by correcting human nature with a change in natural law, altering biology, consciousness and human ethical perception beyond all natural evolutionary boundaries. Thus freed from the corruptions that natural law is heir to, is man created in the image and likeness of His Creator."

A game changer if ever there was one. More at The Final Freedoms

i was pondering on this.

the lowest form of knowing is blind faith. it doesnt need any evidence or reason to be beleived, someone just told you.

the next up is actual experience of phenomena, because perception can be deceiving.

the next up from that is reason, we can make an educated guess or assumption, based on logic and reason.

the highest is proven phenomena; knowing that can be proven with tests that can be repeated time and time again to assure that they are not a fluke.

for example i know there are many elements(they have a table full of'em) they have proven this time and time again. but we havent yet found the truth behind all the elements, so by reason and logic i can posit monism, that all the elements are variants of one primal energy.
i have experienced shapeshifting with shamanistic techniques, but other people see me and say i was like an animal but i didnt actually shapeshift, which means this phenomena was only local to my finite perception, but that was my experience.
but myself and others are amazed by the ridiculous stuff that people will believe just because people tell them; the tooth fairy for example. all because of blind faith.

 

[jtartar]

i was pondering on this.

the lowest form of knowing is blind faith. it doesnt need any evidence or reason to be beleived, someone just told you.

the next up is actual experience of phenomena, because perception can be deceiving.

the next up from that is reason, we can make an educated guess or assumption, based on logic and reason.

the highest is proven phenomena; knowing that can be proven with tests that can be repeated time and time again to assure that they are not a fluke.

for example i know there are many elements(they have a table full of'em) they have proven this time and time again. but we havent yet found the truth behind all the elements, so by reason and logic i can posit monism, that all the elements are variants of one primal energy.
i have experienced shapeshifting with shamanistic techniques, but other people see me and say i was like an animal but i didnt actually shapeshift, which means this phenomena was only local to my finite perception, but that was my experience.
but myself and others are amazed by the ridiculous stuff that people will believe just because people tell them; the tooth fairy for example. all because of blind faith.

Goblin,
I believe that much of what you say is accurate. Mant people are, what is called Gobemouches, which means they will believe anything, are extremely credulous.
One thing to remember though, truth can be relative to that person. Memories can be just an accident within the brain, with chemical and electrical impulses, causing the same changes that real memories make, causing the person not to be sure of their memories. There is a term, Prolepsis, which means; because we learn everything we know by our 5 senses, and because our senses are so easily fooled, we really cannot be sure of anything.
If a person is in sound mind, and has no reason to believe that his senses are misinforming him, he can normally be sure of his memories, and learning.
Put this concept into a belief in An intelligent designer, and Lifegiver, God. We have much to prove He is who He says He is. Everything we see in creation is a miracle to us. Man's mind can only make inferior representations of things that The Great Designer created, and with that they are extolled as great designers. Just as the Holy Scriptures says, there is no excuse for mankind not to recognize their creator, by the things He has created, Rom 1:18-25, Heb 11:1.
The only true God, whose Personal Name, or Proper Name is Jehovah, does not want people to have blind faith in Him, and He does not want people to believe in Him for nothing, Isa 45:19. Jehovah intends to reward all those who love Him and obey Him, because he only makes laws or commandments that are helpful to men, for a better life, Pr 8:17, Deut 10:13, Ps 32:8,9, Isa 48:17-19.

 

[Willamena]

By some recckoning, the highest is perception stripped of all the weight that thinking about places on it. 'Lightened, so to speak.

 

[Vishvavajra]

In Buddhist thought there are basically two forms of knowing: direct experience and inference. Trusting in the words of others and drawing conclusions based on gaps in your own knowledge are both forms of inference. Basically, if you don't perceive it directly yourself, you're making an inference that is based on other things that you know or have experienced.

 

[JosephThomas]

i was pondering on this.

the lowest form of knowing is blind faith. it doesnt need any evidence or reason to be beleived, someone just told you.

the next up is actual experience of phenomena, because perception can be deceiving.

the next up from that is reason, we can make an educated guess or assumption, based on logic and reason.

the highest is proven phenomena; knowing that can be proven with tests that can be repeated time and time again to assure that they are not a fluke.
-

as a note.
Blind faith is not knowing. However faith is not blind, it is based on reasoning. Your 3rd example.

 

[jonathan180iq]

 

[JosephThomas]

Are you simply spamming us?

 

[jonathan180iq]

Are you simply spamming us?

Is this in response to my video post?

No. I am not.
Watch the video. It's entirely on topic.

 

[JosephThomas]

I've seent he video before. It is in no way ontopic. HOw do I know. The name of the TOPIC is " WAYS OF KNOWING". THAT ISN"T A WAY OR relevent to A WAY, OF KNOWING.

check. my job heree is done. wow.

f***

 

[jonathan180iq]

Ok buddy.

 

[jtartar]

Goblin,
You, I believe are correct about blind faith. Our Heavenly Father does not expect us to believe in Him without proof. Consider Rom 1:18-23, especially verse 20. God says that there is no excuse for not seeing that God is the Creator of all things. , It has been calculated that the odds of things being as they are without a wise and Omnilotent God is the same odds as every Atom in the known universe to 1. They say that any odds greater than 40,000 to 1 is impossible.
Isa 45:19, tells us that God does not expect us to seek Him for nothing. Heb 11:6, tells; if we want a reward we must believe that He is, and that He is the one that rewards those that love Him, Pro 8:17, Acts 17:24-31, Rom 2:2-6.

 

[miodrag]

They say that any odds greater than 40,000 to 1 is impossible.

I don't think odds are the proof. John 4:48 "Unless you people see signs and wonders," Jesus told him, "you will never believe."

 

[Spockrates]

There is another way of knowing taught by Socrates, though I don't know many who practice it today. In Plato's Meno and other dialogues he says all wisdom is simply remembering, so no one needs to be taught anything. We all already know all and simply need to recall.

He based this conclusion on his experience of using the Socratic Method--asking people questions rather than giving them answers, and finding that they came to the truth themselves. Such truth must be what they once knew but had since forgotten.

When his execution came near, he told his disciples:

1. There must be one God wiser than all the gods who is the source of all wisdom

2. This God is living wisdom, so to seek truth is to seek him

3. Before birth, our souls must have been in the presence of this God and seeing him knew all he was and so knew all wisdom

4. After death, those who earnestly sought wisdom in life will finally see him face to face, and they will once again know all truth, for he is truth

5. Those who achieve this happy state are called philosophers, for the word describing them means lovers of wisdom

 

[Spockrates]

For Socrates, it appears philosophy was a kind of religious experience, and truth is found apart from the senses and through the religious practices of logic and his Socratic Method.

Now this is different from the belief of some Christians, including many Protestants who agree there is a God who knows all, but instead of leaving us to figure it out ourselves, he conveys his knowledge to us directly. Some recipients of his communication he gives a good deal of information--such as prophets and Apostles--and they write down his wisdom so we might read it ourselves.

So it seems Socrates believed in recollection but some Christians believe in telepathy as a means of receiving truth from God apart from the perception of our senses.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

the next up is actual experience of phenomena, because perception can be deceiving.
the next up from that is reason, we can make an educated guess or assumption, based on logic and reason.

I would put these at the same level. Experience without reason can be misleading, but so can reason without experience.