Examples Of Shared Knowledge

During the first few weeks of class we’ve gone through various texts in order to better our understanding of human knowledge. We have talked about Christianity St. Matthew “The Sermon on the Mount”, Plato and “The Allegory of the Cave”, “The Four Idols” of Sir Francis Bacon, Robert Frost’s “Mending Wall”, and even Carl Jung and “The Structure of the Psyche”. All these texts may have been written in different eras and different places, but they have one thing in common, and that is their understandings of human nature and knowledge, and how they demonstrate to us epistemology (how we know) and metaphysics (what human beings know).

We as humans tend to have an unquenchable thirst for knowledge. We look for knowledge about everybody and everything that surrounds us from our day-to-day life. Sadly though, we must accept that in the grand scheme of life we (as a society) tend to put pleasure above our quest for knowledge. The pursuit of knowledge tends to take time and energy, two things we call invaluable, and it also shows us things that might depress us. Contrastingly, ignorance takes no time and energy. Also, (as the common saying goes) ignorance is bliss. It keeps ugly truths away from us. But that is no reason to forsake knowledge for ignorance. In the early 1900’s, two books were published that would eventually be referred to the pinnacle of classical literature.

The idea that knowledge varies between accuracy and simplicity is, to me, incorrect. Accuracy of knowledge more nearly means valid or correct information but the statement implies that accurate information strictly correlates with complexity in understanding. Therefore, if something is simple or basic in its understanding and production, it is not accurate. Most areas of knowledge depend on accurate information that can be proven and justified, however, are either so ever-changing that accuracy and simplicity seem out of reach, or they are so objective that the complexity of the knowledge is solely dependent on its interpreter. I will examine the development of knowledge in the arts and its interpretation as well as examining the natural

HI. Jesus Gastelum. Your examples in the post are good and proper examples for supporting your idea. The example of George Washington is appropriate to explain common knowledge. As you mentioned, the common knowledge is information that most people already know. Even though I am not an American, I already knew that the first president of Unite States is George Washington. In addition to your post, I think the common knowledge are facts that people can easily see during their lives. For example, people including me see that a lot of cars are on the road in the morning for going to workplaces every day. Even though I am in the house in the morning, I know that many people drive many cars in the morning. This fact does not need explanation anymore.

A perpetual conflict emanating throughout all mankind questions the significance of knowledge to human nature, regarding knowledge’s definition, acquisition, branches, and value. Major role models in the foundation of philosophy - specifically, in this essay, Plato and Aristotle - obsess over the significance of knowledge and its importance to and relationship with the development of human beings and their mindsets. Although Plato’s view on knowledge describes the internal predisposed essence of all Forms and the need for a superior being to extract them from the student, Aristotle’s outlook resides as more reliable and realistic due to his beliefs in the premise of knowledge in the sensation and perception, with continuing development in memory, experience, art and science, and, ultimately, true wisdom.

According to Max Weber, the Protestant Revolution was a significant ideological development in the history of capitalism, not simply religion. The idea that salvation could be attained by works of the faith alone enabled people to separate their economic, secular life from their private religious life. "Contrary to medieval belief, religious vocations were no longer considered superior to economic vocations for only personal faith mattered with God" (Frey 2010). The uncertainty of faith also drove people to demonstrate their moral worth to the community: "Uncertainty about salvation, according to Weber, had the psychological effect of producing a single-minded search for certainty. Although one could never influence God's decision to extend or withhold election, one might still attempt to ascertain his or her status. A life that '... served to increase the glory of God' presumably flowed naturally from a state of election" (Frey 2010).

Knowledge contains “two total different ideas, which allows a dynamic balance to be maintained”: shared and personal. Personal knowledge benefits the individual who possesses it and is obtained through first-hand experience or observation. Shared knowledge, however, has the potential to benefit an entire population. The connection between personal knowledge and shared is an indivisible bond. One cannot separate something that is interwoven; this can be demonstrated in the example of a ladder. If separated, the ladder cannot exist as a ladder without its other half in the same way as before; the rungs would be too far apart and the pole would not be stable. Personal and shared knowledge share a similar quality which is best expressed using Yin-Yang

To address this question we must distinguish between shared knowledge and personal knowledge. Shared knowledge is information that is known by most people in regards to a community. This might include facts or interpretations that are common among a community. For example utilitarianism in ethics is the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Personal knowledge is the knowledge acquired from the experiences of a certain individual. I would say that shared knowledge shapes personal knowledge. This is mainly because from the day we are born we are influenced by many factors that define our character, such as culture, parents, education or religion. Over the course of history we have seen leaders that transformed vast populations with

Knowledge is defined to be facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education. There are two categories that fall under knowledge; personal knowledge and shared knowledge. Shared knowledge refers to what “we know because.” It can also be defined as communicated and constructed knowledge; within culture, social norms, and semiotics. Personal knowledge refers to “I know because.” An expanded definition of personal knowledge refers to personal experiences, values, and perceptions. Shared knowledge changes and evolves over time because of methods that are continuously shared. It is assembled by a group of people. Personal knowledge, on the other hand, depends crucially on the experiences of a particular individual. It is gained

The knowledge system of a society can be divided into two bodies of knowledge, shared and personal knowledge. Shared knowledge is a knowledge that shared and group of individuals it is also continually being contributed creating new forms of knowledge. While personal knowledge is knowledge that someone gains through the own experiences and research. Now in the natural sciences a scientist can further their personal knowledge through shared knowledge in how they can learn and further improve their experiments by learning from those who have performed similar ones. Now there are other instances such as with history. When you use primary sources, you are using personal knowledge firsthand accounts of an event. Personal knowledge is then shared to provide collective knowledge demonstrating that through personal knowledge one can further shared knowledge and vice versa. This all leads to the question How does the interaction between shared and personal knowledge allow for human progress?

How do you gain shared knowledge? Let us take a cake for example; the cake is made up of many different ingredients. A recipe may be said to be knowledge because it tells you how to make the cake step by step. Looking at this shared knowledge shapes your personal knowledge and next time you might not need the recipe because the recipe would be part of your own personal knowledge. If shared knowledge is knowledge that has been received from people or sources around you then personal knowledge is knowledge that is gained directly through firsthand experience or observation .

Though looked down upon by many schools, Arts and Humanities play quintessential educational role in developing moral imagination. The Arts and Humanities allow individual to grow and mature into their own person and not society ideal easily manipulated tool. Arts and Humanities gifts its students with the ability to think critically and build a sense of moral imagination. Which despite the misconception, does support the cause of democratic education.

With art as a medium through which the artist communicates knowledge to an audience, this knowledge has the potential to create meaning and purpose in our personal lives. When someone accepts the artist’s claims as personal knowledge, he gains an understanding that is personally significant to his life. Meaning lies in the individual’s personal interpretation of artwork he deems significant and accepts as personal knowledge. Conversely, the audience finds purpose in the knowledge an artist shares when they feel compelled to pursue a task inspired by the art and the artist’s knowledge claims. The purpose of knowledge can appear as active support for or rejection of the artist’s claims. Due to this distinction between meaning and purpose, knowledge then must be able to produce one without the other, thereby yielding the title’s oversimplistic assumption that “the whole point” of knowledge must produce both, which limits the scope of knowledge’s functions. The whole point of knowledge is not to produce meaning and purpose, as knowledge exists when producing only one, or when serving another function.

Knowledge lies at the foundation of everything in society. While it may not always be noticed, it is always present. This knowledge is used in an array of processes such as creativity, experimentation, analysis, and so much more. From process to process, or area of knowledge to area of knowledge, all knowledge incorporates the processes of both transformation and description in order to evolve as justifiable beliefs. Transformative knowledge includes the product of an individual’s implementation of their personal cognitive processes to challenge traditional perspectives, while descriptive knowledge results when individuals utilize the new perspectives, allowing fresh outlooks to be perceived. While all areas of knowledge incorporate the use of both processes, some may primarily use one or the other. This can be seen in the areas of art and natural sciences. Knowledge in arts seems to primarily describe the world, while knowledge in natural sciences seeks to transform it through innovation and much more.

In Metaphysics 1.1 , Aristotle claims “All men by nature desire to know” (980a) and that this knowledge is freedom. Shortly after claiming man’s want to have knowledge, he begins to distinguish between man and animal; all animals have the knowledge of sense - feeling the cold of a snowflake, or the seeing the sun go down - this all beings have. Aristotle then goes on to describe additional types of knowledge that become more exclusive to the human experience as they go further. Memory knowledge, that only some animals have; the knowledge of experience even less animals have - although some might argue that animals don’t have this knowledge and in fact, this is where the types of knowledge become a privilege that only humans can possess - and finally, the knowledge of art and science, which is agreed that only humans have. It is this type of knowledge that Aristotle says is only allowed once we have the freedom from our most basic needs of survival. Knowledge of the arts and science is the highest level, “for it was when almost all the necessities of life and the things that make for comfort and recreation had been secured, that such knowledge began to be sought” (982b.22-24.) This freedom, the freedom of learning the most honorable of the levels of knowledge, is highly valued by Aristotle and according to Simonides, only “God alone can have this privilege” (982b.30). Knowledge of the arts and sciences if rather the knowledge of the what AND the why - take for example the