The knowledge of ignorance

[Holiday20310401]

Again I think thats just realization. You have no purpose or desire to know the capital of x so the thought won't cross your mind until you've had a reminder that triggers such purpose or desire to give the unknown answer potential.

Its not really important that it is ignorance or not. We just can't process every potential of an aspect, like some quantum mind.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Holiday20310401

Again I think thats just realization. You have no purpose or desire to know the capital of x so the thought won't cross your mind until you've had a reminder that triggers such purpose or desire to give the unknown answer potential.

Its not really important that it is ignorance or not. We just can't process every potential of an aspect, like some quantum mind.

What is realization? And why should you think I have no desire to know the capital? But what has that to do with it, anyway. The fact is that: (1) I did not know what the capital was; and (2) I discovered that I did not know what it was.Therefore, I discovered I did not know something. Q.E.D.

[Holiday20310401]

When you discovered that you didn't know the capital is when the thought first occurred to you, when the answer would first have potential.

I'm not equivocating realization here.
realization - Definitions from Dictionary.com

And sorry, I have to edit a comment I made. "We can't process every potential of an aspect. It should be We can't process every aspect of something unless it has potential.

A thought is reactionary to experience or another thought. So the cause and effect correlation gives potential to the question's answer. Simply, making ignorance irrelevant.

[FatalMuse]

I think the realization of ignorance is a knowledge in itself.

Being able to state "I don't know the capital of X" is now a fact that I know.

[Holiday20310401]

Yes the realization is the knowledge, and the ignorance is the knowledge you don't yet know, from the definitions.

[Zetetic11235]

It seems to me that all of these a posteriori knolwedges are simply indicators which prompt a line of organizaion in thought. These facts are just reorganizations of that which is already present in the mind. You do not 'gain' knowledge, you 'gain' a redirection of thought by having experienced what is the case. A posteriori knowledge is simply a restriction of relational possibility and a priori extrapolation.

I would say that in a sense there is no division between mind and matter, that the dualism is false, mind is a result of matterial organization. I also think it likely that a posteriori and a priori can be united in light of this.

It seems that that which is logically possible is inherent in every physical object, I would say that it is quite likely that logical possiblity is itself a posteriori and it is quite evident that it is of physical reality, thus it should be of no surprise that we can see the relational possibilities of physical objects, and further not surprising that anything which we can consider is in fact the case, for it is a part of physical reality.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by FatalMuse

I think the realization of ignorance is a knowledge in itself.

Being able to state "I don't know the capital of X" is now a fact that I know.

Or that I did not know the capital, and that now I do know it.

[Mr. Fight the Power]

Understanding of one's own understanding is still understanding, so there is no reason to consider this counterintuitive.

Also, to use the prior example, you are not only realizing that you don't know the capital of Brazil, you are also learning that there is a location that there is the capital of Brazil.

So this is not counterintuitive, realization of ignorance is the gaining of subjective knowledge, and is always accompanied by the realization of objective knowledge.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Fight the Power

Understanding of one's own understanding is still understanding, so there is no reason to consider this counterintuitive.

Also, to use the prior example, you are not only realizing that you don't know the capital of Brazil, you are also learning that there is a location that there is the capital of Brazil.

So this is not counterintuitive, realization of ignorance is the gaining of subjective knowledge, and is always accompanied by the realization of objective knowledge.

I am afraid I don't know the difference between subjective and objective knowledge, but when I find out that the capital of Brazil is not what I thought it was, I have found out something I did not know before.

[Mr. Fight the Power]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

I am afraid I don't know the difference between subjective and objective knowledge, but when I find out that the capital of Brazil is not what I thought it was, I have found out something I did not know before.

Objective knowledge is easy enough.

Subjective knowledge includes things like qualia, feelings of consciousness, etc. I think that grasping what one understands and what one doesn't qualifies.