´Knowing´+variously+interpreted

//“What is knowledge?// sounds simple enough. We all know roughly what it is to know and to be correct; to be wrong, to doubt and to be only partially right. If you’ve thought about knowledge at all, you may hold some view close to what can be called the ‘Trivial Pursuit’ model. That is, knowledge is seen as facts which are more or less simple, discrete, non-controversial and displayed through recall. This model is generated and confirmed by much of your school experience and, certainly, exploited by television game shows. People with a lot of this kind of knowledge are often called clever and those with less of it are often called something not so complimentary. “In the world outside the classroom, knowledge-seeking never stops. Governments appoint commissions, armies rely on intelligence, scientists conduct research, doctors constantly retrain, teachers carry on with professional development, wrestlers study their opponents, journalists check their sources, musicians look for better ways to compose and capture an audience, philosophers clarify concepts, gamblers study the odds and so on. We speak about //life-long learning// or //learning how to learn// as qualities more valuable than acquiring a mountain of facts that may not be relevant when the time comes to use them.”(1)  There are several possible usages of "know". Here, we will put forward three that are fruitful to consider in English (recognizing that other languages classify differently) and move to discussion thereafter.

**1. __Knowing //by acquaintance// - direct personal familiarity__**  Knowing a good friend, for example, or knowing your own garden, or knowing the joy of holding a beloved child. “ Acq u a i ntance i s direct a n d immed i a t e ; i t consist s of " r aw fee l s. " vVe are acq u a i n t ed w i t h a person, or wi th a p l ace , o r with a fo od. Russe ll ca l ls i t "the k i nd of know l e dg e a dog-lover h as of his d og." We may hav e degrees of acquain t anc e, but acquai nt ance as such is nei th er tru e nor fal se ; t h a t is, a l t h o u g h I may b e w ron g in s a y i n g t ha t th a t man across the street is my fr i end Bert, it is my in f erence t h at i s erroneous , and not t h e acqua i ntance. Acquainta n ce i s ind e ed t h e sort o f knowledg e a l over often has, or a teac h er, or a physic i a n , or an anima l t r ainer. Martin Buber c l aims h e k nows God by direct acq u aint a nce. But acquain t ance i s know le dge on l y in a prel i mi n ar y or inart i c ul ate s e nse. Organized sc i ent i f i c and p hi losophic know l edge, b y co n tr a st , is knowing //that// such and s u ch is the case: it is descriptive of fact ; it is couc h ed i n propositions.”(2)  **2. __Knowing //how// of skill__**

Knowing how to dance, or cook, or do an experiment in science, or write an essay. “ One ma y know how to swim, for e x a mple, o r h ow to tie a bo w tie , without being ab l e to describe exac t l y how one does these thing s. Thi s is oft e n tr u e of ski l ls a nd c r a fts, of win e tasting and pu z zl e solv i ng, of be i ng able to i dent i fy a liter ar y s tyl e and to c om p ose a melody. Most of us kno w h o w to recognize a face, for examp l e, or a n accent , without be i ng fu l ly a ble to st a te that knowl e dge i n propositions. Mic h ae l Po l a nyi points out that t o know how to bal a nce on a bicyc l e does not enta il knowing that " for a g i ven ang l e of unba l ance, t he curvat u re of e ac h w i nd i ng is inverse l y propor t ional to the square of the speed . " (2)  **3. __Knowing //that// something is so – knowledge by description or propositional knowledge__**

Knowing that water boils at a particular temperature, or knowing that Ottawa is the capital of Canada, or knowing that smoking increases your chances of cancer. “… propositional knowledge i s different from (but neither bet t er than, nor worse than) knowledge by acquaintance; and likewise different from knowing how, and from feeling, and from sensing, and from other sorts of experience. […] The paradigm of such knowledge is "I know that //p//", where //p// stands for any proposition, that is, any statement that is either true or false, such as "Today is Tuesday" or "Eisenhower succeeded Truman." (2)

Some languages have several words for what is covered by the one English word "know". The three English senses are interconnected in many ways, not least in the process of learning. To what extent is that true in other languages? Can, for example, the Spanish verbs “saber” and “conocer” be used indifferently to express the three types of knowledge described above? You can read in the Spanish section of this wiki this text that talks about the different usages of these two Spanish verbs.

**ACTIVITY 1**

1) Think of a definition of “knowledge” taking into account what you have read in the text above. Which are the problems you might face when trying to define “knowledge”? Explain briefly. 2) After reading Ben Dupré’s text “The Tripartite Theory of Knowledge” answer the following question: Which ways of knowing do you think that are neccessary to “really know”?

(1) Bastian, Sue et al.; Theory of Knowledge, uncorrected proof copy at: http://www.pearsonschoolsandfecolleges.co.uk (2) Abel, Reuben; //Man Is The Measure//, The Free Press, Collier Macmillan Canada Ltd., USA, 1976, pages 19-24