Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Essay Example

With reference to two areas of knowledge discuss the way in which shared knowledge can shape personal knowledge.

Perceptions pertaining to how shared knowledge can shape personal knowledge are diverse according to the sciences  and culture through, people which  people articulate knowledge Some assumptions explain that knowledge strives to acquire an understanding, differentiating among what constitutes belief, truth, facts and justification. This essay will explore two areas of knowledge and how they areshared among cultures and in the world in shaping personal knowledge. Knowledge derived from religious science and ethics are shared liberally in the world and among cultures. These two areas of knowledge will be the focus of this exploration.

In religion for example, knowledge is not acquired merely through education, learning facts, creating truth, justification and believing in what is communicated though the word, butrather bysome divine intervention or personal knowing. Here religion embraces emotion as a significant aspect of knowledge acquisition, revision production, shaping, classification and acceptance, which distinguishes between science and philosophy. The obvious knowledge issue question facing philosophers is whether the knowledge energing from facts produced in religious science can be proven as truth. In this instance, people who are called spiritual/ religions leaders cloud the authenticity of knowledge gained through this source as being proclaimed from a being, God, and a book the bible. Importantly through the ages these same theories of knowledge are shared to generations. It is often classified as religious education (Kant, 177).

Significantly, religious knowledge is placed into four dimensions namely content; frequency; intensity and centrality. Content pertains to facts; frequency; intensity and centrality are associated with determining truth, establishing beliefs and justification for their existence. The knowledge issue here is where is the corresponding evidence that God/ sprit/divine exists somewhere in a human soul, which is invisible. Facts and knowledge then become intangible/abstract concepts beyond the conventional philosophical paradigms. Often it is contended by religious scholars themselves that there is no way to correctly interpret the vibrations expressed by the human soul in the form of knowledge. (Kant, 177).

Religious cultures that believe in spirit possession and speaking in tongues value knowledge shared  and interpreted through this medium. It is a sacred undertaking since the supernatural takes precedence above the natural through which manifestations occur. Often knowledge shared using this strategy has a binding effect on the participants in the knowledge sharing experience. During an observation while transformed, the spirit shares knowledge, persons speak in tongues  andothers respond with interpretations, which are expected to edify the congregants. Importantly, for some cultures this is a weekly sharing activity conducted at the worship and celebration service (Kant, 177).

However, elements of religious knowledge, which are still relevant to this discussion regarding knowledge being a systematic organization of facts lay in the existence of truth. All religions claim to have truth, which is an important feature of knowledgesharing  and personal interpretation practice. In the same way there are strong belief systems in religions institutions, justified by doctrine/ content, which again are facts written in a holy book that guide actions. These facts form the knowledge basis of religious practice and are shared daily. New knowledge emerges as the spirit gives utterances and this shapes personal knowledge(Kant, 177).

When ethical knowledge sharing applications are made to this discussion the element of emotion as it relates to a moral conscience influence organizing of facts and beliefs justifying what ought to be shared in reality. Ethics is classified as moral philosophy. The knowledge issue questions what facts about ethics exist that justifies sharing as the truth. Could it be said that only knowledge considered truth or has been proven truth is shared? No! Philosophy bases its truth upon assumptions. While religion seeks to establish knowing beyond actual facts, ethics is preoccupied with facts that determine right and wrong actions by defending; systematizing and recommending concepts(Kant, 177).

In our modern world culture there is so much knowledge shared regarding professional ethics. Every profession has a code of conduct determining the ethics for that profession. Ethical knowledge is widely shared and shaped into personalknowledge because  violation of these ethics result in personal penalties. For example, in the nursing profession before licensure nurses must confirm to the code of ethics by signing their consent to abide with them based on the knowledge they have acquired. These ethical knowledge based practices often become so complicated that they create a dilemma for both nurse and patient. Ethically, nurses are expected to be enhancing life through providing efficient care to their patients. This is their ethical responsibility. However, when they are asked to withhold treatment in facilitating the death of a patient applying the new assisted suicide philosophy, where is the ethical knowledge transferred at their enrollment? This is show shared knowledge may not necessarily be the truth, when viewed from the premise of shaping personal knowledge. This assumption is really a symbolic interactionist assumption because people relate to the world in the form of things, concepts and interaction (Lafollette, 174).

Another example, of ethical knowledge   sharing/shaping confusion is when a police officer kills someone who does not seem to be in any danger to him, but he/she feels threatened or is just prejudiced about the subject and decides to end the person’s life. How is ethical knowledge shared  and  personal knowledge shaped in this situation? The ethics concerning preservation of human life becomes invalid while self-preservation takes precedence. It seems as though with the transference or sharing  into shaping of ethical knowledge the life of an animal is more valued than a human in some instances. Critics of ethics knowledge sharing have argued that, perhaps, this is ethics shared in isolation while still shaping personal belief and knowledge. In the midst of increasing crime, intolerance of man by man, hate, animosities and money taking precedence over a human being/life it is difficult to share ethical knowledge  and develop  logical shaping of it amidst these circumstances (Lafollette, 174).

In continuing this discussion on sharing and shaping ofknowledge, it is imperative that some clarifications regarding the theory of knowledge as it pertains to sharing its contents  and development of personal interpretations towards shaping, be undertakenTheory of knowledge posits that its foundations distinguishes philosophy fromscience. As such, the definition of knowledge still is a controversial issue among philosophers even down to the twenty-first century. Classical views embrace the notion that for a statement to produce knowledge it must possess three distinct elements. First the statement must be justified, proven true then believed by a substantial number of people. Arguments have been subsequently that people can say that they believe, but they do not. It is left then for truth, poof and justification of the statement to be established for knowledge authenticity (Engel, 215).

If this is so then, from a philosophical premise questions regarding what constitute belief, truth and justification may have to be clarified. However, perceptions of truth itself are controversial, in the same way  is knowledge. In society today everywhere people claim to havetruth especially, among religious leaders. Instinctively though, what is the truth? Precisely, what is knowledge? Incidentally, philosophers claim that words are used to describe truth(Engel, 215).

For example, correspondence theory of truthadvances that truth is relative to the world and if it accurately describes it. Importantly, this theory posits that beliefs and statements must correspond with the state of affairs or reality.Justifiably; a person may say ‘there is no money.’ To describe this statement as truth or falsehood there must be proof that nowhere in the world money exists. Once this can be proven, reality is established and the statement could be considered truth leading towards acquisition, which is shaping of knowledge from a source and sharing of it(Cavell, 238).

Likewise, justification and belief in the statement must correspond to reality for knowledge to be acquired; produced, shaped, classified, accepted and shared. The knowledge issue here, in this open ended question corresponding to how isknowledge shared is how shared? Can truth, belief and justification alone offer enough scope for knowledge to be acquired; produced, shaped, and shared in relation to our 21^st century world experiences?  (Cavell, 238).

Modern philosophers also contend thatfacts are synonymous to truth when consideredin relation to opinions. Specific to philosophy it must be clarified that facts might be conceived as statements that make a true sentence. Also, another philosophical perception is that facts could mean events applicable to a sentence, which makes it true. The statement,’ Barrack Obama is the President of United States of America’ undoubtedly concerns the fact that Barrack Obama is the president of United States of America (Alex, 10).

More importantly, with further reference to Engel’s interpretation of the correspondence theory it was explained that elements, which make a sentence or statement true are those  samefeatures linking it to a fact. Precisely, this sentence ‘the world is round’ while it is a scientific fact philosophically, it predisposes to the idea of an objective world, which means it has crossed thebarriers of belief and justification in aligning itself with truth and knowledge (Alex, 10)

Facts, truth and knowledge are interrelated from the premise of conceptualization and interpretation. Philosophers further expound the facts notion to describe compound facts; fact value distinction model revealing that one fact can actually lead to interpretations of a number of other facts. For example, London is the capital city of Great Britain leads to the interpretation of the fact that both London and Great Britain exist. Next they are places. Therefore, in that sentence/ statement two other facts are compounded Great Britain and London being places and they actually are here on earth apart from the original fact communicated that London is the capital of Great Britain. Importantly, these are strategic knowledge sharing/shaping vehicles (Alex, 10)

Philosophers attempt to clarify the boundaries of moral philosophy in advancing that it is not keeping in alignment with religion, social or even legal systems, but aligning one’s self to truth, which shapes personal knowledge. Essentially, in sharing knowledge we communicate truth. Facts are  shaped into truth form a personal perspective. Therefore, in summarizing this argument concerning how knowledge is shared throughreligion and ethics (moral philosophy) can shape personal knowledge interpretation, I must conclude both religion and ethics are two major knowledge sharing shaping forces in society. Their knowledge sharing/shaping techniques could be both beneficial to society as well as dangerous.

References

Alex Oliver, Fact, in Craig, Edward. Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge,    Oxford.2005. Print

Cavell, Stanley.Knowing and Acknowledging, Must We Mean What We Say?Cambridge University Press, 2002), 238–266.Print

Engel, Pascal. Truth. McGill-Queen’s Press- MQUP.2002 Print

Lafollette, Hugh.Ethics in Practice: An Anthology. Wiley Blackwell. Oxford 2014 Print

Kant, Immanuel. Religion and Rational Theology. Cambridge University Press. p. 177. 2001. Print