paarsurrey
Veteran Member
To me experience rather than experiment is the basic source of human knowledge.
How do you see it?
How do you see it?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Experience rather than experiment is the basic source of human knowledge
- Thread starter paarsurrey
- Start date
I would say interpretation is first then experience and then experiment.
Why I say interpretation is because most learning comes from reading or hearing and then belief that it is true.
That belief may be based on personal experience or experiment but the idea learned through reading or hearing will generally not be tested. It will be accepted or rejected based on your interpretation of the work or of the presenter for the average person.
Example you read in the Newspaper that a man robbed a store in your local town. You generally just accept the fact adjust you life based on your experiences and move on. Very few people verify that the store was actually robbed. You may even futher the story by talking about it with your neighbors each only reading it in the paper. There are some that will actually know what happened through experience or experimentation but most people have trusted sources or levels of belief that allow them to just accept reading and hearing as fact.
Why I say interpretation is because most learning comes from reading or hearing and then belief that it is true.
That belief may be based on personal experience or experiment but the idea learned through reading or hearing will generally not be tested. It will be accepted or rejected based on your interpretation of the work or of the presenter for the average person.
Example you read in the Newspaper that a man robbed a store in your local town. You generally just accept the fact adjust you life based on your experiences and move on. Very few people verify that the store was actually robbed. You may even futher the story by talking about it with your neighbors each only reading it in the paper. There are some that will actually know what happened through experience or experimentation but most people have trusted sources or levels of belief that allow them to just accept reading and hearing as fact.
By "experiement as a source of knowledge" do you refer to Pragmatism? In Pragmatism, practice (experiment) informs theory, and then theory in turn informs better practice. It's the way, for instance, we learn how to play soccer, so (apart from learning the rules) it is the source of knowledge of "how to play soccer."
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
Please be so kind as to explain the difference.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
You mean belief plays the most part, then interpretation, then experience, then experiment; seldom verification is done in respect of what one reads or hears.
Is that order correct ? or you would like to change it.
Shuddhasattva
Well-Known Member
Experiment is self-aware experience.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
I mean that experiments are done afterwards; one has already decided as to what will be the result of one's experiment based on one's experience; one makes an experiment just to verify one's experience.
So the basis is the experience.
Orias
Left Hand Path
I agree.
You can experiment on something, but then its just an experiment. It all depends on the experiment, the variables being measured and which one's hold more influence over the choices you make after the experiment is conclusive.
Usually the achievement of "I learned that I don't like it" has little merit in comparison of those who experience the totality of the certain experience on a daily and resilient schedule.
When one starts experimenting on a daily basis, with the same thing, it tends to not be an experiment anymore.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Experience, imagination, experiment and rationality have all contributed to human knowledge.
Ah, you mean we design experiments to demonstrate the validity of predictions. In that case, yes, prediction comes first.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Religious knowledge is based on having experience of something spiritual; it does not need experimentation.
Well, no. Inquiry, prediction and interpretation are a priori knowledge.
Sir Doom
Cooler than most of you
Whether you need to or not, you test it every day. This thread is a fine example.
Sir Doom
Cooler than most of you
Well, its true that they are, but that is only in relation to the subject inquired, predicted or interpreted. In and of themselves they are not devoid of experience. They are, in fact, experienced by the one using them and are experiences independent of their subject.
To say that thinking and experiencing are the same thing is a slippery slope if you want to get into the experience of thinking or the thought of experience.
