Chapter 1 Understanding Knowledge

What do you truly know? And what are the sources of that knowledge?

The more you contemplate, the more you realize the extent of your ignorance. As you probe deeper into what is deemed right, you uncover multiple viewpoints and often conflicting responses. Long-standing convictions are being questioned at an unprecedented pace. Many individuals are scrutinizing the necessity of law enforcement, while others debate the merits of capitalism, and yet others speculate about the safety of vaccinations or the validity of the coronavirus.

How do you acquire knowledge? Was it through your parents, online articles, or news broadcasts? Perhaps you witnessed it firsthand or heard it audibly.

Dean Burnett, author of The Idiot Brain, asserts that our senses are not always reliable. Instead of continuously depending on sensory input, our brain constructs models of anticipated outcomes, which can significantly shape our understanding, often more than direct experiences do.

Your perceptions are influenced by your past experiences, emotional state, physical health, and cultural background. What your senses perceive from the external world is merely a fragment of the complete narrative.

Consider this: how often have you been absolutely certain of a fact, only to later find it disproven?

But was it truly disproven? Was there a scientifically validated study? Even if such research existed, could it have been based on flawed assumptions, an insufficient sample size, or misrepresented results by the media for greater sensationalism?

In fields such as nutrition, psychology, astronomy, and education, widely accepted theories have been overturned during my lifetime. Reflect on the number of times you’ve learned about researchers revealing that our previous understanding was erroneous.

Or perhaps you misremember. A study in Scholarpedia highlights how easily one can fall victim to false memories. "It is efficient for the perceptual and memory systems to take shortcuts and focus on meaning extraction, since that will suffice in many cases. However, the cost to these shortcuts is that neither a detailed memory nor a confidently held one is necessarily true."

This assertion appears reasonable and highly credible, yet how can we ascertain its truth? How can anyone fully grasp the intricacies of human memory systems?

Futurist and author Robert Anton Wilson proposed that we should abandon the term 'is.' He suggested, "I don't know what anything 'is'; I only know how it seems to me at this moment." He introduced the concept of being 'model-agnostic,' which implies not wholly accepting or rejecting any worldview. Following Korzybski, he emphasized expressing things in probabilities rather than absolutes.

Does this imply that you should abandon the quest for truth and instead embrace whatever feels right to you?

I think not.

On the contrary, it suggests you should strive to form a well-informed opinion based on the most credible evidence available. This involves science—peer-reviewed studies, references, and diverse sources. It means evaluating various claims and applying critical thinking to discern the most plausible explanation, all while acknowledging that certainty is ultimately unattainable.

It entails maintaining an open mind, questioning everything, but assessing information based on its likelihood. If something appears absurd, it likely is.

Dean Burnett cites a well-known English children's television presenter as a case in point. Many enraged parents were convinced they heard him utter an inappropriate word in a children's song. "Remember how he took a huge risk for no appreciable gain and uttered a context-free profanity to an audience of toddlers?"

Why would he do such a thing? Once this idea spread, a surprising number of people accepted it as true, despite the overwhelming implausibility and contradicting evidence from their own senses.

The notion of 'appreciable gain' is crucial here. When evaluating the credibility of any information, consider who stands to benefit. If the answer points to 'they' wanting to 'control' you, dig a little deeper.

Who are 'they'? Where's the substantiation? Why would anyone have an interest in controlling you? There might be valid responses to these inquiries, but don't seek proof merely to confirm your biases.

Every piece of information carries a probability rating, likely fluctuating based on time, context, and audience, but never reaching absolute certainty.

While it may be easier to adopt the mental frameworks of family or friends, the most fulfilling life is likely one built upon the closest approximation to reality that you can attain. That, to me, seems worth the extra effort.

The first video, Robyn - Do You Know (What It Takes) - YouTube, explores themes of self-discovery and the complexities of personal knowledge.

The second video, Soulé - What Do You Know (Official Video) - YouTube, delves into the exploration of knowledge and the questions that arise in our understanding of the world.