Knowing, you are in the know

The ‘learning paradox’ also known as ‘Meno’s paradox’ are a tantalizing conundrum that has plagued mankind from the times of Plato ~ (429?–347 B.C.E.). The paradox involved is best explained in one of Plato’s writings, where Socrates, the protagonist, is described as having to have said the following: ‘[A] man cannot search either for what he knows or for what he does not know[.] He cannot search for what he knows–since he knows it, there is no need to search–nor for what he does not know, for he does not know what to look for.’

 

Obviously, knowing is a somewhat tricky business. The use of the word implies that knowledge is a tool to be utilized. The question that needs to be put to bed on this subject is ‘what is known and what is purported to be known in that claim of knowing?’  

 

There are two main ingredients in knowing and those ingredients are, reasoning (a priori) and witnessing (empirical). Of course, in most situations what someone ‘knows’ is derived from a combination of both empirical evidence and an a priori effort. Yet there is a third method by which people ‘know’ something and that is via information transfer. For this author, the only knowing that is going on in an information transfer is that person A told person(s) B the words ‘X’; the validity and veracity of statement ‘X’ is outside of the scope of what person B knows until person B applies reasoning or witnessing to validate statement ‘X’. Just listening and believing must not be standard for anyone who doesn’t wish to live in a cult like atmosphere.

 

It seem that too many people these days live in a cult like atmosphere for they have abandoned reasoning and witnessing for the more lackadaisical approach of ‘just listen and believe’. This is most likely the result of Person(s) J silently abdicating the mandate and role long understood to be part of the profession of Journalism. In previous years the lack of retractions was a source of pride for many a media outlet; those days seem to have drifted off into the mists of the past.

 

In those days gone by, the keystone for most of the journalistic profession was a story wasn’t considered to be true unless three independent witnesses were required. This practice has been replaced with the ‘un-named source close to the situation’. There is a term known as the ‘fog of war’ which describes the situation where a third party observer is bombarded by claims by both sides as to who is winning on the field. The fog of war is now being played out right in front of everyone’s eyes when it comes to social and political issues throughout much of the western world.

 

The digitalization of media/news outlets has degraded the profession of journalism for both the vendor and the consumer. The reader is requested, moving forward, to note the number of online articles from news outlets that have the term ‘modified on’ showing the last time the article was changed; the result of this is the possibility that two people in a discussion will be referencing the same article that has two different timestamps, thus resulting in two different ‘fact’ statements. 

 

Context

The mental exercise above was born out of a conversation with a close friend of this author. The discussion was around the transportation of illegal aliens flown into Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts under the direction of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. This author’s position was that DeSantis made a good political move to bring to the attention of the American people the impact of an open southern boarder. The counter argument presented by the friend was that it is wrong to use people for political purpose. There is no problem with the counter argument in principle; unfortunately not everyone is as principled as this friend.  

 

For relationship purposes the conversation was mutually ended by both sides; side-note, empirical evidence has shown that some arguments are best not had with this friend and this one single item is not the hill to damage or bury the relationship on. It is known to this author and the friend that this author has a tendency to be more in the know on current social political matters, while the friend has a some interest and is mostly informed by a small sampling from the journalistic profession.

 

‘Whataboutism’ can be used to derail a discussion, though this is not always the case, especially when there is reasonable equivalence, a chance of hypocrisy, or perhaps the other person just doesn’t know. Applying Hanlon’s razor, the last listed item was the starting position not taken.

 

Moving on to what wasn’t said, the DeSantis move was not a novelty because both Obama and Biden played the same game, just against in the other direction. Article I, Section 2 of the US Constitution mandates that every resident of a state is counted in the census that takes place every ten years. There is an interesting clause in some law somewhere that makes the number of people in a US State the measuring stick for the number of delegates sent of to the US Electoral College and yet only US citizens are permitted to vote in elections, at least for now.

 

Those are the ideas not conveyed via words that were not spoken. The judicious lack of persistence for this topic at hand was based on the awareness of this friend’s childhood, for this friend was once categorized as a refugee remaining in a refugee camp for two years, thus giving them what some might call a soft spot for refugees.

 

 

The moral lesson realized - while it may be a feel-good moment to be right, taking the moral highroad might just lead one away from the hill that an important part of one’s life may just die on if that path is not taken.

 

 

 

Definitions

A priori - relating to or denoting reasoning or knowledge which proceeds from theoretical deduction rather than from observation or experience.

 

Empirical - based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.

 

Semantics - the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. There are a number of branches and sub-branches of semantics, including formal semantics, which studies the logical aspects of meaning, such as sense, reference, implication, and logical form, lexical semantics, which studies word meanings and word relations, and conceptual semantics, which studies the cognitive structure of meaning.

 

Whataboutism - Whataboutism or whataboutery denotes in a pejorative sense a procedure in which a critical question or argument is not answered or discussed, but retorted with a critical counter-question which expresses a counter-accusation.