• irmoz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    The theory of knowledge (epistemology) is a distinct and storied area of philosophy, not a debate about semantics.

    There remains to this day strong philosophical debate on how we can be sure we really “know” anything at all, and thought experiments such as the Chinese Room illustrate that “knowing” is far, far more complex than we might believe.

    For instance, is it simply following a set path like a river in a gorge? Is it ever actually “considering” anything, or just doing what it’s told?

    • capybara@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      No one cares about the definition of knowledge to this extent except for philosophers. The person who originally used the word “know” most definitely didn’t give a single shit about the philosophical perspective. Therefore, you shitting yourself a word not being used exactly as you’d like instead of understanding the usage in the context is very much semantics.

      • irmoz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        When you debate whether a being truly knows something or not, you are, in fact, engaging in the philosophy of epistemology. You can no more avoid epistemology when discussing knowledge than you can avoid discussing physics when describing the flight of a baseball.