Distinguishing Knowledge from Opinion Name In the Meno, Plato uses the elenchus as his method of finding true knowledge. The elenchus is similar to a cross-examination, where one asks the other questions that would provoke the latter to remember the truth…
In Plato’s Meno, Socrates and Meno argue about what virtue is and whether it can be taught. What ensues is an exchange of ideas which lead Socrates to further prove his point – that virtue cannot be taught and is rather simply recalled. For Socrates, “the soul is immortal” and therefore “there is nothing which it has not learned.2 The soul therefore only has to draw out from its reservoir of knowledge all the truths that can be known. In order to prove this point, Socrates calls on a young servant boy of Meno’s and begins using the elenchus on him, hoping to draw out the truth from him without teaching him anything. Socrates begins his demonstration of the elenchus by drawing a 2 ft. x 2 ft. square on the ground. This square has an area of 4 square feet and Socrates then asks the boy how to come up with a square double this area, which is 8 square feet. Through a series of questions and answers using a trial-and-error method, Socrates and the __________________________ 1 Gladwell, p. 197. 2 Baggini & Fosl, p. 13. boy finally come to a conclusion that double the area of the given square is the square of its diagonal. Many times during the interrogation, Socrates points out to Meno that he is not teaching the boy and rather makes him remember the truth. ...
For the French philosopher, the means of finding true knowledge is through skepticism, or the method of casting doubt on all arguments, principles and beliefs until any of these could be proven true. Descartes’ principle of “methodological doubt” begins when he notices that his senses sometimes deceive him.4 He then proceeds to wonder what is real and what is not. He thinks that everything that he can perceive through the senses may merely be opinion and not the truth for he can doubt the existence of these things. Moreover, the fact that he may be deceived by the senses also somehow makes him cast doubt on the goodness of God, for he wonders why a good God would allow him to be deceived. As this deceptive quality does not fit Descartes’ notion of a good God, he replaces God with an “evil genius” that possesses the power to deceive him completely.5 With such a powerful evil force, Descartes then begins to doubt everything else, even the verity of mathematics and geometry, and he asks himself, “What then will be true? __________________________ 3 Baggini & Fosl, p. 16. 4 Ibid., p. 50. 5 Ibid., p. 52. Perhaps just the single fact that nothing is certain.”6 Descartes, however, finally comes up with the conclusion that, despite the fact that the existence of everything can be doubted, he exists: “…there is no doubt that I exist, if [the evil genius] is deceiving me.”7 Descartes then takes it from here and he supposes that the fact that he is being deceived rests upon the fact that it is because he thinks so. With the premise that he as a thinking being now exists, Descartes is able to conclude that he as a thinking being can also doubt, understand, affirm, imagine, sense and perform many other functions related to thinking. Moreover, using ...
Cite this document
(“Distinguish Knowledge from Opinion Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/philosophy/46952-distinguish-knowledge-from-opinion
(Distinguish Knowledge from Opinion Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 Words)
“Distinguish Knowledge from Opinion Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/philosophy/46952-distinguish-knowledge-from-opinion.
Today, the process continues and the quest for knowledge is present in all aspects of human endeavor. Certainly, there are several means developed to achieve this but the most important point out of this fact is that methods became systematic and scientific that enabled people to identify and acquire knowledge in several ways.
The fact of the matter lies in the fact, that man cannot attain knowledge if he does not think; this, even as a proposition is considered to be impossible. By thinking of undertaking things, dealing with them, and ultimately being deceived by them, it becomes all the more evident to man that there is a reality that exists.
Second is the knowledge-definition claim where, for any concept (C), if a person knows what a table is, then they know a Socratic definition (D) of that concept. I agree with the Platonic claim because concepts generally have characteristics which are observable and, once seen and synthesized, allow the viewer to classify the concept based upon the presence or absence of those characteristics.
According to the paper knowledge management can probably be addressed as one of the most controversial and multilateral, but very promising developments in the organisational practice over the recent decades. Most of the prominent business companies of modernity report of their devotedness to the principles of KM.
After becoming an independent established discipline in the middle of 1990s, KM is perceived as an essential aspect of HRM and information technology in modern organisations (Davenport & Prusak, 1998).
KM incorporates the processes of knowledge use, knowledge creation, knowledge sharing, knowledge transfer and knowledge renewal (Malhotra, 1998).
Bertrand Russell summarized it well, “Theory of Knowledge is a product of doubt…in the hope of being able to distinguish trustworthy beliefs from such as are untrustworthy.” (“Theory of Knowledge for the Encyclopaedia Britannica”).
Before 1990s, performance appraisal was conducted in relation to the tasks assigned to employees and teams and it was not conducted in relation to the goals and objectives of the organization. On the other hand, performance management is