Is such a thing possible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter STT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

STT

Guest
Is creating a prior knowledge possible without an extensive amount of material experience?
 
STT said:
Is creating a prior knowledge possible without an extensive amount of material experience?
Click to expand...
What do you mean by “prior knowledge.” You need to provide a context to your question.
 
I think STT means a priori knowledge (i.e. from reason) as opposed to a posteriori knowledge (from experience). It is an interesting question. Do we need a framework of experience in order to reason?

According to Aristotle, nothing is in the mind without first being in the senses. This is a sound principle. Theoretically, however, a brain could be “programmed” with what theologians call “infused” knowledge. That is what we think Adam had (the preternatural gift of science), in addition to the knowledge he gained from experience. Christ, too, is said to have had infused knowledge in addition to the knowledge resulting from the Hypostatic Union, and that of experience.
 
STT said:
Is creating a prior knowledge possible without an extensive amount of material experience?
Click to expand...
  1. Who or what is this knowledge created in?
  2. Who or what creates this knowledge
  3. What type of knowledge are we discussing
  4. What do you mean by material experience.
  5. What do you mean by extensive?
 
STT said:
Is creating a prior knowledge possible without an extensive amount of material experience?
Click to expand...
It is for God.

I would say it is not for man, for God is the creator.
They say that a baby will grab and hold on to stop itself from falling
even though they have no experience of what it is to fall.
This is seen as prior knowledge but cannot be credited to the child
as a prior knowledge ‘created’ by the child, but rather,
it should be seen for what it actually is, a knowledge
gifted to us by God the creator of all things.

I’m no expert or scientist or anything like that, it’s just my opinion.
:tiphat:
 
Ad_Orientem said:
I think STT means a priori knowledge (i.e. from reason) as opposed to a posteriori knowledge (from experience). It is an interesting question. Do we need a framework of experience in order to reason?

According to Aristotle, nothing is in the mind without first being in the senses. This is a sound principle. Theoretically, however, a brain could be “programmed” with what theologians call “infused” knowledge. That is what we think Adam had (the preternatural gift of science), in addition to the knowledge he gained from experience. Christ, too, is said to have had infused knowledge in addition to the knowledge resulting from the Hypostatic Union, and that of experience.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe in infused knowledge. Do you have an argument in favor of that? I however believe that brain is structured in such a way that allows us to create knowledge.

Moreover how is creating a prior knowledge possible when we know it is distinct from a posteriori knowledge? I mean what is the root of a prior knowledge? The root cannot be experience since that is a posteriori knowledge.
 
Roseeurekacross said:
  1. Who or what is this knowledge created in?
Click to expand...
Human.
Roseeurekacross said:
  1. Who or what creates this knowledge?
Click to expand...
Brain.
Roseeurekacross said:
  1. What type of knowledge are we discussing
Click to expand...
The knowledge which comes from reasoning, a priori.
Roseeurekacross said:
  1. What do you mean by material experience?
Click to expand...
Basically what we experience in this world, as opposed to spiritual experience.
Roseeurekacross said:
  1. What do you mean by extensive?
Click to expand...
Large enough to allow the creation of a prior knowledge.
 
STT said:
Human.

Brain.

The knowledge which comes from reasoning, a priori.

Basically what we experience in this world, as opposed to spiritual experience.

Large enough to allow the creation of a prior knowledge.
Click to expand...
So kind of like knowledge by osmosis?

You are going to have to explain priori to me. Do you mean, i see an red stripe on that spider, therefore its venomous?
 
Roseeurekacross said:
So kind of like knowledge by osmosis?
Click to expand...
I don’t think it is just gathering of knowledge but creating it through deduction. I think both conscious and unconscious mind are involved in it.
Roseeurekacross said:
You are going to have to explain priori to me.
Click to expand...
A prior means relating to or denoting reasoning or knowledge that proceeds from theoretical deduction rather than from observation or experience.
Roseeurekacross said:
Do you mean, i see an red stripe on that spider, therefore its venomous?
Click to expand...
I think that is instinct. A prior knowledge like, if I have two apples now, and I plan to add three apples, I will have five apples.
 
STT said:
I don’t believe in infused knowledge. Do you have an argument in favor of that?
Click to expand...
I don’t have an empirical argument for infused knowledge as such (as theologians understand it), but there is empirical evidence for the existence of genetic memory. Monarch butterflies, for example, find their way from Canada to Mexico and back every year, over a period of three generations of butterflies. Some birds raised in isolation chambers know the song of their species without having heard it.
STT said:
how is creating a prior knowledge possible when we know it is distinct from a posteriori knowledge? I mean what is the root of a prior knowledge? The root cannot be experience since that is a posteriori knowledge.
Click to expand...
Could you rephrase the question? It is not clear to me what you are asking here.
 
Ad_Orientem said:
I don’t have an empirical argument for infused knowledge as such (as theologians understand it), but there is empirical evidence for the existence of genetic memory. Monarch butterflies, for example, find their way from Canada to Mexico and back every year, over a period of three generations of butterflies. Some birds raised in isolation chambers know the song of their species without having heard it.
Click to expand...
I don’t consider genetic information and what is in our instinct as knowledge. Knowledge is awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation.
Ad_Orientem said:
Could you rephrase the question? It is not clear to me what you are asking here.
Click to expand...
I mean, we derive a posteriori knowledge from experience. I believe that we however create a prior knowledge. I don’t believe that a prior knowledge is derived from what we have in instinct. Do you believe that we really create a prior knowledge too?
 
STT said:
Is creating a prior knowledge possible without an extensive amount of material experience?
Click to expand...
And an example of apriori reasoning/knowledge that we might discuss would be…?
 
STT said:
Is creating a prior knowledge possible without an extensive amount of material experience?
Click to expand...
Yes, by intuition.

Awareness of truth without mental effort is intuition. Intellect has the role to perceive the truth arrived at by a reasoning process or immediately perceived as intuition.

Mind is the intellect as recipient of knowledge. Knowledge is some reality from outside the mind re-presented in the mind.
 
STT said:
I don’t believe in infused knowledge. Do you have an argument in favor of that? I however believe that brain is structured in such a way that allows us to create knowledge.

Moreover how is creating a prior knowledge possible when we know it is distinct from a posteriori knowledge? I mean what is the root of a prior knowledge? The root cannot be experience since that is a posteriori knowledge.
Click to expand...
If God is God He can instill whatever knowledge He desires.
 
STT said:
. . . Knowledge is awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation.
Click to expand...
By that definition, a priori knowledge is not knowledge, unless “experience of a fact” includes reasoning.
STT said:
I mean, we derive a posteriori knowledge from experience. I believe that we however create a prior knowledge. I don’t believe that a prior knowledge is derived from what we have in instinct. Do you believe that we really create a prior knowledge too?
Click to expand...
Yes I agree: based on experience, we create, or rather arrive at, further knowledge through a process of reasoning.

Infused knowledge is something more, something not proper to our nature: it is by definition a preternatural gift. One need not deny the status quo in order to affirm the existence of the preternatural.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top