Subject: Re: [IFETS-DISCUSS] Knowledge Defined
From: Hall, Mary (Mary.Hall@OPENPOLYTECHNIC.AC.NZ)
Date: Thu 29 May 2003 - 00:31:06 MEST
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 10:31:06 +1200 From: "Hall, Mary" <Mary.Hall@OPENPOLYTECHNIC.AC.NZ> Subject: Re: [IFETS-DISCUSS] Knowledge Defined
Hello, all
Kaylyn's posting on the nature of knowledge has proposesd an ideal state of absolute
'knowledge' about a given topic, which I think can serve a useful purpose in education,
as something to aspire to.
While I cannot subscribe to the notion that anyone is likely to reach a state of
perfect knowledge - whether they be heart surgeon, trade apprentice, photographer,
or Zen practitioner - the process of successive approximations to such an ideal is one
that does ring a bell with me. In fact, it sounds quite Platonic.
As in mathematics and in spiritual endeavours, the belief in a hypothetical state of
perfect knowledge does not have to define a pragmatic goal - in fact, I would be loth to
let any surgeon practice on me who believed they had nothing left to learn, while on the
other hand, if my surgeon still aspired to honing, refining, and perfecting their 'working
knowledge' to a state approaching completeness (perfection) it would fill me with confidence.
Likewise, a learner or teacher who expects perfect and absolute knowledge to be manifest
in the real world is likely to miss the point of the process and value of learning and
knowing.
The analytical framework that Kaylyn uses of defining subsections of 'knowledge' apart
from the cognitive is useful for exploring the nature of the beast. I believe that, as
she suggests, the whole 'knowledge' of an adept practitioner or theorist will be
greater than the sum of the parts suggests. (It is interesting in this regard that
some of the great physicists of our time claim that the more they learn of the physical
world, the more they believe in the existence of the divine.)
I prefer the inclusive view of knowledge, accepting that one does not need to be the
ultimate expert in order to claim the term. My children, workmates, or students may
have a degree of knowledge of any given topic or topics that may be more or less
complete than my own, but that does not imply that the one of us who has less is
without knowledge.
Is 'knowledge' a useful concept when applied to an individual anyway, or does it
only become relevant in the social context of interaction with others?
Mary Hall
Project Co-ordinator
Learning Design Group
ddi 064-4-913-5708
mary.hall@openpolytechnic.ac.nz
---------------------------------------------------------
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discussion@computer.org
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss.html
Forum website: http://ifets.ieee.org/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@massey.ac.nz
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.ieee.org/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Thu 29 May 2003 - 01:16:59 MEST