Knowledge can be a dangerous thing

Ivor Ralph (Rafe) Edwards

The title is from something my father used to say. I always thought it rather odd. Surely the more one knows the better?

Today, we are overwhelmed by information and data. As I get older I process it more slowly, as colleagues, friends and family have commented. But is it only an age-related issue? No it is not! The pace of the world has increased and with it there is less chance to assimilate what one sees, hears and feels, or for reflection around assumed ‘facts’,

I have come to realise that when I listen to others, there is far less time to really consider what they are saying, or what I am seeing. This has consequences for memory. I like to link new information as I receive it with what is already stored. Those linkages become more complicated the more I know and I have realized I do have many more ideas than in the past if I can think as I go along: so much to know.

So, what do I mean when I say, ‘know’. I realized I had no idea what others define as know. I consulted the online dictionaries: this is the result.

Oxford English Dictionary (OED)

‘Be aware of through observation, enquiry, or information’

‘Have developed a relationship with (someone)through meeting and spending time with them; be familiar or friendly with,’

Marriam Webster (MWD)

‘To perceive directly, have direct cognition of’

‘To have understanding of’

‘To recognize the nature of: DISCERN’

‘To recognize as being the same as something previously known’

‘To be acquainted or familiar with’

To be aware of the truth or factuality of: be convinced or certain of’

‘To have practical understanding of’

‘To have sexual intercourse with’

Plus some synonyms:

Comprehend, understand, appreciate, endure, experience, witness, conceive discern. Wisdom, expertise (near synonyms in MWD)

Some other’s views about knowledge

Frank Zappa wrote, “Without deviation from the norm progress is not possible”  This brings the issue of questioning knowledge to the fore.

Descartes, in the 17th century, is popularly quoted as saying ‘I think, therefore I am’, in trying to establish the reality of one fragment of knowledge. The epistemology and semantics of his statement has been queried by many. I do not wish to pursue those issues but to point out that the statement is still the subject of much debate.

Karl Popper controversially argued that when one makes a scientific hypothesis to be considered as a knowledge truism it should be testable not only for its positive evidential support, but also examinable for negation. Many have pointed out the difficulties with this admittedly useful idea. Being testable for negation is not always possible to achieve practically, and also there is always the validity of the actual testing to consider.

Very many other philosophers – notably perhaps Hume, Kant and the existentialists – have problems with ‘knowing’. I would say we all do but different considerations and writings make it seem clear that we practically cannot know things in a definitive way.

In essence, there does not seem to be any way of a human understanding any knowledge as completely true, solid and incontrovertible. This includes logic, reason and statistics, the latter being considered by some to prove certain knowledge in instances and within context though really dealing with probabilities of truth in relatively frequent situations.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb argues the importance of the occurrence of rare, though serious, events. Starting in 2001, and quoting from Wikipedia:

1.       “The disproportionate role of high-profile, hard-to-predict, and rare events that are beyond the realm of normal expectations in history, science, finance, and technology.

2.       The non-computability of the probability of consequential rare events using scientific methods (owing to the very nature of small probabilities).

3.       The psychological biases that blind people, both individually and collectively, to uncertainty and a rare event’s massive role in historical affairs.”

The above concerns the main arguments the author made in his book, ‘The Black Swan” (Taleb, Nassim Nicholas (2010) [2007]. The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable (2nd ed.). London: Penguin. ISBN 978-0-14103459-1.)

Some direct consequences of knowing

‘Know’, then, has many depths and kinds of meaning. It requires initial sensory input direct or indirect. It requires (complete and accurate) memory. It requires external/internal triggers

Knowledge can be represented in many ways, but accuracy depends on memory and one’s ability to express an correct representation of what one knows, and for the recipient to have the capacity to process the representation and therefore to remember it appropriately.

The context of how and in what circumstances one comes to know anything is important.  Emotions and feelings will affect one’s perceptions, and issues of causation may play a part in what one understands about knowledge. One’s psychological and physical health will change perception, by affecting aspects of consciousness

Secondary knowledge gained from reading, being told about anything is very different from first-hand experience, the passage of information having  a major effect in as many ways as the initial complex directly learned knowledge.

Time changes what we know: knowledge changes with time, not least because new aspects that affect knowledge arise and need consideration, though just because it is the latest observation cannot mean it is necessarily correct, can it? Certainly we must not forget to trace knowledge back to original work and to have a lineage of development of knowledge to aid comprehension.

Some discussion around the simple thoughts and reasoning above

1. ALL knowledge is variably reliable: none can be complete and therefore an incontrovertible truth.
   1. The search for single causation cannot be realised either since we do not fully know the contexts, nor the complexity of the antecedents
2. There is a major need to be aware of the levels of uncertainty that may exist in knowledge and to be aware of the potential consequences of possibilities and how to prevent or manage them.
3. As discussed by Taleb, a major requirement is to make oneself, as aware as possible, of the seriousness consequences of any risk and seeking all information that is relevant before addressing the likelihood of the risk occurring: ‘Fault-tree’ analysis in planning is an example of this approach.
4. Although frequently requested, the information around uncertainties in any given matter of knowledge is rarely complete. Often the differences in the context of previous knowledge and current works are not examined. The dispositions of materials and people involved are not considered, knowledge used being mostly mathematical, Psychological, ethical, social and other human factors not being considered sufficiently.
5. Learning about and actively considering uncertainty should be paramount in understanding using knowledge.
6. Perhaps above all, the use of knowledge should be always followed and critically assessed in practice.

Conclusion

Like my father, I propose that everything that we know is, at some level, uncertain. I would maintain that also makes what we know potentially dangerous.  If anything is important and particularly if harm is at all possible then check critically and check again as the use of knowledge leads to actions which may be unexpected and unintended. Frank Zappa is probably right about deviation from the norm being necessary for ‘progress’, but that progress will have its own set of uncertainties – good and bad.

Footnote

Also, like my father, I have been intellectually ill-disciplined, giving an incompletely detailed hypothesis, but with the hope that, in being stimulated to think about the topic, we may end up with humans that take better care of each other (and everything they know): better knowing-better care?