|
KNOWLEDGE – FACETS OF ITS
GUISES |
IDEA |
TRUTH |
BOND |
|
Salient Aspects |
|
|
|
|
Allows/suggests emotional
links (i.e., emotional intelligence) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Explains the effects of
its existence (consequences of "she knows") rather than just its
content (results of "she knows that ...") |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Reveals the connected
nature of humans (each human carries a world) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers knowing that is
processual (e.g., negotiations, exploration, identity testing,
discussions, politics, writing) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Does not encourage
intolerance |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Works with neuron circuit
weightings |
no |
? |
Yes |
|
Explains unconscious
reactions |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Allows understanding of
knowledge as power |
no |
no |
Yes |
|
Allows for extended mind
(e.g., external memory) |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Allows an economic
valuation of knowledge (costs, payoffs, investment) |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Implies inherent body
metaphors & perspectives (in/out, front/back, etc.) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Works with non-ideal
cases |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Reveals our cares and
loves; shows degrees of grasping and expectations |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers "how-to" knowledge |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers personal
acquaintance, familiarity |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers adaptations of
organisms to surroundings (e.g., birds’ knowing air, cat’s knowing a
territory) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Allows transitive
properties (e.g., my knowing A related to B facilitates my knowing B) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers pattern
recognition and intuition |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers the love and
intensity of knowledge |
yes/? |
No |
Yes |
|
Reveals effects on
knowers and on knowns |
|
|
|
|
Explains how knower’s
perceptual and musculature patterns are modified |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Explains how a known’s
future probabilities are modified |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Shows the selective
effects on evolution by knowledge (e.g., breeding) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Supports participatory
knowing |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Explains corrupting
effects (e.g., If too many people know about it, ...it will be
ruined.) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Can be dangerous (e.g.,
"If I tell you, I’ll have to kill you.") |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers the importance of
both secrecy and popularity (e.g., "The best kept secret in the
Bahamas") |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Orients knower in a
humble position |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Cognitive science
evidence and Extended mind evidence |
|
|
|
|
Works with neural nets |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Acquired in discrete,
cognitive steps |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Allows for thinking as
conceptually loaded with body metaphors |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Includes knowledge
located within the body (the hands, feet know) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Includes efficiency of
distributed storage (e.g., memory in environment) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers perception-action
circuits that are fundamentally both |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Is fundamentally
biological |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Is compatible with
dynamic systems theory |
no |
? |
Yes |
|
Is compatible with
ecological psychology |
no |
? |
Yes |
|
Advantages |
|
|
|
|
Is context rich,
facilitating specifics |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Reveals perceptual and
self-interested biases |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Allows an understanding
of bias/prejudice |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Allows social cohesion
around best knowledge |
yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Is context rich, thus
allowing more specificity |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Clarifies the distortions
and manipulations of mass media |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Reveals the unfoldment of
knowing |
No |
no |
Yes |
|
Allows for associative
thinking |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers situated knowledge
(specific knowledge of particular people and circumstances; e.g.,
ethnic knowledge) |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Reveals culture as
knowledge relational clusters/attractors |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Fosters knowledge
refinement without totalizing control |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Draws attention to the
inherent creativity of knowledge |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Points at wisdom more
than informational acquisition |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Does not promise final or
ultimate points of view |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Does not push slight
effects out of the everyday into fuzzy "spiritual" dimensions |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Aspires to a planet
covered in an opulent, enlivening, creative noosphere of massive
relational interplay rather than perfect stasis |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Sees communication as the
push and pull of relational weaving rather than the parroting of
perfections |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Carries the emotional
bonds revealed in therapies |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Reveals the grasping
attachments discounted in Buddhism |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Opens to the receptive
grace as demonstrated in Christianity or Islam |
yes |
No |
Yes |
|
Sociological evidence |
|
|
|
|
Covers the knowledge as
culture argument of sociologists of knowledge |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Covers narrative and
discourse theories where knowledge ridges split us into groups |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Describes the
complexification rather than simplification of knowledge spread |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Can be stored in and
transmitted by rituals and institutions |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Dispenses with
philosophical "extra" categories |
|
|
|
|
Is integral to action
(not knowledge plus agency) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Is integral to clear
thinking (not knowledge plus logic, reason) (Uses difference that
makes a difference and pattern satisfaction) |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Is integral to integrity
(not knowledge plus morality) |
no |
No |
Yes |
|
Is integral to aesthetics
(not knowledge plus beauty) |
no |
no |
Yes |
|
Explains thinking by
analogy/metaphor/association |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Is interactionist
(neither constructivist nor objectivist) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Does not presume the
"God’s-eye-view" |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Linguistic/semiotic
compatibility |
|
|
|
|
Explains the relational
gymnastics of rhetoric |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Allows for paralanguage
(e.g., gestures, body language, etc.) |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Allows for origin of
signs (transitive reinforcement between two bonds) |
No |
No |
Yes |
