The difference between knowing and knowing

[slobake]

Somone once told me that the farthest distance known to mankind is the space between the brain and the heart. We can know something intellecually but not be able to apply it to our own lives. Kind of like a psychiatrist who is really good at helping people but can't get over his/her own phobias.
Thoughts? Experiences?

[pocketgroove]

It's easier to have a clear, unbiased mind about things, standing on the outside of the issue. It's easy to know what the right thing to do is, but since that usually requires some sort of sacrifice or difficult change that we ourselves don't have to make, it's also easy to lose perspective and underestimate how challenging something can be. It also seems that we don't always recognize the faults in ourselves that seem so apparent in others.

[MatticusMania]

[placedesjardins]

Very true. There are times when your underwear/boxers have a nasty brown stain. You know it's going to smell bad and there's no logical reason to smell it. You would even advise others not to smell it. But, you smell it anyway.

[Bloodhammer]

I call it the "tradesman's home" effect.

[geeza]

Most people don't have the ability to be objective about themselves. I guess that's why there's objective and subjective.

[bassinplace]

I know that Geddy Lee is a great bassist and I love listening to him. Can I play like that? No.

[Ziltoid]

Descartes distinguishes three forms of knowledge if I'm right, but they get blurry in English. Their Latin names are: intelligere, comprehendere and concipere I think.



You guys are helping me study for my Descartes exam, how nice!

[bluesblaster]

Originally Posted by placedesjardins

Very true. There are times when your underwear/boxers have a nasty brown stain. You know it's going to smell bad and there's no logical reason to smell it. You would even advise others not to smell it. But, you smell it anyway.

pretty much sums up the human condition right there

[fdeck]

Originally Posted by Ziltoid

Descartes distinguishes three forms of knowledge if I'm right, but they get blurry in English. Their Latin names are: intelligere, comprehendere and concipere I think.



You guys are helping me study for my Descartes exam, how nice!

Intelligence, comprehension, and constipation?

One of the things that philosophers are great at is explaining something by breaking it up into multiple things.

[Ziltoid]

Originally Posted by fdeck

Intelligence, comprehension, and constipation?

One of the things that philosophers are great at is explaining something by breaking it up into multiple things.

And many of them actually forget the explaining part.

My attempt at translating would give: "comprehend" (fully understand) , "to make a representation of" (which involves imagination a bit) and "to hear" (as in an acknowledgment of existence, not actual hearing).

For examples I could give: an apple, a chiliagon and the concept of infinity (Descartes' definition of infinity).

[Unrepresented]

Man has wants, man has needs, and man's needs have wants. Reconciling those doesn't always come easily.

[bluesblaster]

I ams what I ams - popeye

[matante]

Originally Posted by slobake

Somone once told me that the farthest distance known to mankind is the space between the brain and the heart. We can know something intellecually but not be able to apply it to our own lives. Kind of like a psychiatrist who is really good at helping people but can't get over his/her own phobias.
Thoughts? Experiences?

My thought is that you're describing the difference between knowledge and understanding.

When you gain understanding of something (through experience), it becomes true in your heart and that is far more valuable, and applicable, than intellectual knowledge.

[slobake]

When I was young I knew everything. After a long life of experience I realize that I understand just a few things.

[Unrepresented]

Originally Posted by slobake

When I was young I knew everything. After a long life of experience I realize that I understand just a few things.

You're no Supertramp, but you're getting closer with every post.

[UncleFluffy]

"hear and forget, see and remember, do and understand"

[HaMMerHeD]

My brain is about a foot or so from my heart.

Not so far at all.

But as to what you are actually talking about...it's the differences between knowledge, understanding, and wisdom.

[MatticusMania]

Originally Posted by Ziltoid

And many of them actually forget the explaining part.

My attempt at translating would give: "comprehend" (fully understand) , "to make a representation of" (which involves imagination a bit) and "to hear" (as in an acknowledgment of existence, not actual hearing).

For examples I could give: an apple, a chiliagon and the concept of infinity (Descartes' definition of infinity).

Funny, I was kind of thinking of this yesterday on my drive home.

I came to my own conclusion of 3 types of "knowing".

A person can know of something, ie "Yes, Ive heard about that..."
A person can know about something, ie "I have studied this concept and can discuss/explain it"
Or, a person has applicable knowledge of something, ie "I know about this, and can explain, because Ive been through this before".

[hrodbert696]

In German there's a distinction between wissen and kennen. Wissen (pronounced "Vissen") means "to know" in the sense of having knowledge of something - I know that 2 + 2 = 4 or whatever. Kennen means "to know" in the sense of having personal familiarity with something, or more often someone - I know my friends, I know the way home.

But I think the OP also has to do with the difference between knowledge and wisdom. I may "know" that there are going to be nasty consequences if I do X - but I may not be wise enough to actually stop myself doing it.