?

Log in

curiosity

July 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
talking sense

cognitive agnosticism and the whole environing cultural context

and while I am at it by joculum

I believed then in the possibility of ekstasis or intuitive understanding whereas now I believe in intuition as a more efficient form of understanding…as, in fact, the only possibility of understanding as distinct from believing that one has understood rather than understood in part.

That sounds like gobbledygook because it is. What I mean is that there is no such thing as a perfect match between the world and our picture of it; there is not even a perfect match between what we think we know about the world and what we actually know about the world within the generally agreed-upon framework of “things that can be known.”

But we generally adhere to the error that Wittgenstein eventually renounced that “Anything that can be known at all can be known clearly. Everything that can be said at all can be said clearly.” The truth is more nearly the opposite; unclarity is built into the fabric of knowing, and all we can do is get better and better at identifying the areas of blur. There will always be some area where we think we have gotten it exact at last, when we haven’t. (See, for example, the phenomenon of diminishing replicability that seems inbuilt into scientific tests that possess sufficient variables, meaning almost everything that is useful or interesting.)

Comments

I like this.