Knowledge:

Always amusing; thanks for responding.

Now for a real reply .

We never stop gathering knowledge,from the time we are born until the day we die. Some knowledge we find is useless knowledge like little bits of trivia,but other times we may start reading a book,watching a documentary on TV or mostly now on the net,but somethings will click our minds to want to learn more and it's then that we really start to learn again,no matter what age we are.

To much knowledge of some subjects can make us big headed in some peoples eye's and they shy away from talking to us,but a little knowledge tends to make us dangerous.

Today's world revolves around the internet and there are millions of things to learn from it,My world before the net meant going to a library and reading the information we needed to know rather than just Copy,Paste and Print,without learning anything.

Um yeah course.

Not according to externalists, who say that your knowing something depends on certain facts which are external to your mental life. For example, they might say that there has to be a certain causal link between your beliefs and the states of affairs in the world which your beliefs concern.





If the mind is just consciousness, then it doesn't store things; I'd say that's too much of a bad analogy between computers and minds. The brain stores information, perhaps, or it stores patterns. But the brain is not the mind, in the sense that the brain is not consciousness.

Erimitus: that has been my experience too; a generation of intelectual bulimics regurgitating information without ever understanding it. (no one on tfs of course)

Erimitus: A couple thousand years ago (at about the same time he wrote ‘the Republic’) , Plato, wrote a story called ‘Pheadrus’.
In the story the inventor of writing, explaining that writing would improve memory, presented this new invention to the king. The king rejected writing as a tool of recollection arguing that the people would not have to retain knowledge themselves.

Erimitus: Of course in the fourth century BCE very few people had the internet.

So to put it in a nut shell,the king was as dumb as dog s*** and thought everybody else was to eh??

I agree with your first part,welllllllll,all except the part in Brackets

And no Internet back in the Fourth Century and I suppose they thought the Earth was flat to didn't they .



Times change and peoples quest for knowledge doesn't,it all comes down to whether we want to learn or just know nothing,personally I think most today are happy being ignorant to the world.

There are other cases too, especially around the Eastern Mediterranean.


This one is from China.

Source link [voices.yahoo.com]

Emperor Qin Shi Huang, China . 246-210 B.C.

Most people have never heard of Qin Shi Huang, China 's first emperor, but the influence he had on Chinese society is still prevalent today. It was during his rule that construction began on the Great Wall of China in order to promote centralism and avoid foreign influence. After unifying China under one government, Qin Shi Huang became a reformist of politics, economy, and culture. Worried that his legacy might be lost, the emperor ordered all previously published books not of his dynasty to be burned. Scholars who secretly maintained possession of forbidden books were buried alive in a paranoid attempt to "erase" history and avoid any comparison to previous rulers. Qin Shi Huang knew that books were the link to his nation's heritage, and destroying them would strengthen his grasp of control. Classic works of poetry, history, and culture were lost during the first recorded book burning in history.

Ahh yes… there is nothing like a good old fashioned book burning. I heat my entire house by burning nothing but religious books. The Koran throws off a nice warm glow.

The rational behind book burning (censorship) may be that books can be used to spread false information and the readers of the books internalize information which they perceive to be the truth but in reality is false. We cannot have people thinking for themselves. <shudder> The next thing you know they will be storming the Bastille.

The internet is a good way to the spread Gossip and rumors because there is (usually) no record of the original source and in many cases the content cannot be verified.

The Paradox is that the extent of knowledge is now so great that the only way to preserve what is known is to somehow record it. (alas)

Personally I believe everything that the Ministry of Truth comes up with and I have no recollection of it ever being any other way.

E: That which is known is in the mind of the knower.

BB: Not according to externalists, who say that your knowing something depends on certain facts which are external to your mental life]. For example, they might say that there has to be a certain causal link between your beliefs and the states of affairs in the world which your beliefs concern].

E: I am sorry that it is taking me so long to respond. I am not familiar with ‘Externalism or ’Internalism’.

Knowledge is that which is known.
That which is known is in the mind of the knower.

That which is known is known about something; at least some of that which is known is independent of the knower, and (assuming an objective reality) there is a relationship between knowledge (that which is known) and that something which is known about. (i.e. there is the subject (the knower) and there is the object (that about which the something is known (i.e. the object of perception), and the objective reality is, at least in part, the cause of the subjective reality).

E: Is that correct?