Is there anything you know that was not arrived at scientifically?

[nameless]

It seems to me that a good definition of 'knowledge' is the contents of 'memory', at any moment.
People try to make it 'more' by egoic identification and emotional content(distortion?).
Without all the 'value judgements', etc..
'Memory' = 'Knowledge'

[Arjen]

I would like to point everybody, but Aedes and Resha Caner in particular to my -just posted- blog entry. I think it is very much what we are speaking of. I hope all of you like it.

[Resha Caner]

Not that we've reached an agreement, but since activity has died down, let me ask this next question.

The context I tried to set for the discussion had, implicit within it, an idea of a level of confidence.

Of these things you "know" within science and without, in which is your level of confidence higher?

[Arjen]

Originally Posted by Resha Caner

Not that we've reached an agreement, but since activity has died down, let me ask this next question.

The context I tried to set for the discussion had, implicit within it, an idea of a level of confidence.

Of these things you "know" within science and without, in which is your level of confidence higher?

I think more than one criterium needs to be met. If things are studied only within science it has as much worth as not studied within science, but by the other criteria.

I hope you see my point.

[boagie]

[quote=Resha Caner;14413]Is there anything you know that was not arrived at scientifically?

I would ask, is there anything you know that was not biologically arrived at? even scientific truths, these are supposedly biologically concluded in an experiment far far away. Truth, that stone I just dropped is hot, the pain in my right hand confirms the fact.

[Resha Caner]

Originally Posted by Arjen

I think more than one criterium needs to be met. If things are studied only within science it has as much worth as not studied within science, but by the other criteria.

I hope you see my point.

I think I understand you, but should the two conflict, a judgement is made. So, regardless of whether the criteria are different, it becomes an issue of which has the higher level of confidence.

Originally Posted by boagie

I would ask, is there anything you know that was not biologically arrived at?

Temporally, no. Spiritually, maybe.

[Holiday20310401]

Originally Posted by Resha Caner

Is there anything you know that was not arrived at scientifically?

I said in another thread that I would move this question here.

I think what is meant here is trying to figure out if there is any knowledge derived from something other than intellect, stuff that is naturally known of a human being, but I guess that doesn't seem possible to me.

[OntheWindowStand]

I know my name it didn't take any experiments any theories or anything for that matter it is was given to me thats all. I Assume you trying to say nothing worth knowing or nothing can be known unless through science that why i used a strange example was easy and to point.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by OntheWindowStand

I know my name it didn't take any experiments any theories or anything for that matter it is was given to me thats all. I Assume you trying to say nothing worth knowing or nothing can be known unless through science that why i used a strange example was easy and to point.

Yes, or another example is, 2+2=4. But the notion of "arriving scientifically" is vague, and needs to be specified.

[Theaetetus]

Most lessons learned through growing up are not arrived at scientifically. If they were the mortality rate of young children would be high. When your parents tell you need to ingest poison and you obey you survive. Had you experimented with ingesting the chemical you will get sick or die. Another example is crossing the street. You are told that the car could kill you if you get hit. You would not then go and try to find out what actually happens when the car hits you.