What is scientific knowledge?

continuing from may 5 ...

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

A particular branch of scientific knowledge: ‘the science of genetics’ (wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn)

’Scientific knowledge’ – So, is there unscientific knowledge? Why do you call some knowledge ‘scientific’ and some not?

1. state of knowing: knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding. 2a. department of systematized knowledge as an object of study. 2b. something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge. 3a. knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method. 3b. such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena. 4. system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws

1. What is ‘knowing’ and how do we ‘know’ what is there to know? 2a. What do you mean ‘systematized’ – and who determines whether it’s systematized or not? 2b. 3a. 3b. What system of knowledge? What is the physical world? 4.

May 5, 2008 insight:
Science is insight acquired in a formal, systematized manner; experience is insight gained through trial and error, without system or method.

Questions to answer this time:
What is knowing / knowledge? What is scientific knowledge? What is the scientific method?
What is insight? What does ‘systematized’ mean? What is the physical world?

Knowledge, cognition, noesis: the psychological result of perception and learning and reasoning

You are differentiating ‘learning’ from ‘reasoning’ and from ‘perception’ – and yet you do not define those terms. That is the problem with defining a word and not going down to the basics. Poorly constructed definition.

University of Melbourne
is part of the hierarchy made up of data, information and knowledge. Data are raw facts. Information is data with context and perspective. Knowledge is information with guidance for action based upon insight and experience.

What is known by perceptual experience and reasoning. For example, 1234567.89 is data; "Your bank balance has jumped 8087% to $1234567.89" is information; "Nobody owes me that much money" is knowledge; and "I'd better talk to the bank before I spend it because of what has happened to other ...

That is all arbitrary. To me, data is knowledge; information is knowledge; what you say is knowledge is conclusion or assumption!

TR 350-70] Information or fact required to perform a skill or supported task.

Which is knowledge: the key to open the door or the acquired information to do the job, in this case, to use a specific key to open the door? The key is fact or data; the information in sequence (or process) is knowledge. If it has not been proven to be useful in doing something, it’s not knowledge or it’s theoretical knowledge (theory). Knowledge can be considered as the distillation of information that has been collected, classified, organized, integrated, abstracted and value added. ...

In that case, hardly anything can be considered knowledge until we have agreed on its classification, organization, integration, abstraction and value added! Not useful; this is not knowledge.

Relationships, facts, assumptions, heuristics and models derived through the formal and informal analysis or interpretation of data.

I like that you’re saying ‘formal’ and ‘informal’ analysis or interpretation. Formal or organized or systematized or logical analysis is one way to arrive at knowledge; another is knowledge simply gained by insight.

Knowing nature of things in order to act upon the reality.

Quite a practical definition of knowledge. The problem is: What is ‘knowing’ and when do you know that you know while you’re knowing?

New Advent (Catholic Encyclopedia)
Knowledge is essentially the consciousness of an object, ie, of anything, fact or principle belonging to the physical, mental or metaphysical order, that may in any manner be reached by cognitive faculties. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm

In that sense, knowledge belongs to the object of knowing, not to the knower? What if we differ in our cognition of that consciousness?

New Link: Learning Domains or Bloom's Taxonomy (by Don Clark):
A committee of colleges, led by Benjamin Bloom, identified three domains of educational activities: cognitive: mental skills (knowledge), affective: growth in feelings or emotional areas (attitude), psychomotor: manual or physical skills (skills). These are the goals of the learning process. knowledge: recall data or information – recite a policy, quote prices, know the safety rules. Keywords: defines, describes, identifies, knows, labels, lists, matches, names, outlines, recalls, recognizes, reproduces, selects, states.

No room for discussing if the learner agrees or not? Knowledge is predefined for the student. This implies prior knowers, those who distinguish between rubbish and knowledge; they are the determiners or knowledge. I cannot accept that.

Bloom's Taxonomy (Larry Johnson & Annette Lamb, eduscapes.com):

LJ & AL inserts a discussion of creative thinking in Bloom's Taxonomy – this is an error. There is no creative thinking in Bloom's Taxonomy, not one step in the creative process.

Bloom's Revised Taxonomy (doesn’t say who revised it)
Katrina Long, http://www.kurwongbss.qld.edu.au/thinking/Bloom/blooms.htm
It has 6 levels of thinking, from ‘low- to high-level thinking activities’

These are listed from top to bottom, as typed. These are not levels of thinking; you can’t say one is higher than the other. Evaluating and analyzing are two different levels of thinking? Can’t be. They are critical thinking. Applying is critical thinking, so is understanding, so is remembering. The students will be as confused as the teachers!

Popular posts from this blog

GABRIELA is scandalized by Asingan Bikini Open

"O Naraniag A Bulan." How an old folk song can help choose new Senators!

What Federalism? Precisely, That Is The Question!