What does the abovementioned process tell us about Knowledge itself?
We believe that we learn new things. But in fact, what we know dictates what we learn…
What we think is knowledge, is a manifestation of what we believe.
We interpret what we see based on the eyes we have. Right?
The opening paragraph says clearly it’s still a mystery and no-one knows for sure. It’s an odd link to accompany the rest of your post.
In terms of evolutionary progress, there are gradual changes in things like skeletal evidence, and the rest is speculation as to probably and possible pressures and pathways to evolve certain characteristics. I don’t think any archaeobiologist claims certain knowledge, just best-guesses on the available evidence and reasonable postulations.
I don’t know what “objective” knowledge is. Certainty? There are things we can be certain of because we define them in a particular way. There are plenty of things we are certain of, in practice, and checking our justifications for that is a large part of what philosophy entails. There are also many things that it doesn’t make sense to talk of being certain about, because it doesn’t make sense to doubt in the first place. If you’re looking for religious certainty, that’s an attitude rather than an accomplishment.
I can tell you that the women I have known have all had orgasmism.
And I can tell you from experience, that not only do women have orgasms, but at least two of the women that I have had to pleasure to provide such orgasms to, also ejaculated!
I am mainly refering to knowledge which does not rely on “something else” to be valid. As I see it all knwoeldge depends on our previous knowledge on other things. It is like we see the world through a specific filter.
