class notes

Academic Knowledge

Plato: Knowledge-had to be described & communicated = certainty

“Propositional” knowledge/Platonic knowledge/ knowledge by description

N Reasonable & Convincing

‘Flying pig example isn’t knowledge’

Formac statement of convincing knowledge

(Conditions for knowledge)

“Knowing that”

Test:

1. Justified

2. True

3. Belief= necessary but not sufficient.

Truth

1. Public-Dog has to be friendly to all

2. Independent-separate from belief

3. Eternal –but must be true now & forever

Empiricism/Experiential

See it

Induction

Smell

Hear

Touch

Taste

Rationalism

Instructed using a prior knowledge

‘Knowledge that came before’

Deduction

General theory =specific

CORN

Tangy Honey Mustard Sauce:
Water, sugar, dijon mustard (distilled vinegar, mustard seed, salt, water, white wine, spices), corn syrup solids, honey, soybean oil, distilled vinegar, food starch-modified, egg yolks, contains 2% or less of the following: mustard seed, turmeric (color), spices, xanthan gum, salt, titanium dioxide, propylene glycol alginate, sodium benzoate (preservative), yellow 5, yellow 6.
CONTAINS: EGG.

I was not able to find any foods with preservatives in it that doesn’t have egg.

I found this list of foods that do have High Fructuous Corn syrup that I thought was interesting: http://www.accidentalhedonist.com/index.php/2005/06/09/foods_and_products_containing_high_fruct

Did any information in the book come as a surprise to you? If so, why do you think that specific piece of knowledge was kept from you? Does the producer of this knowledge have any responsibility? What is your responsibility as a knower?

I thought it was surprising that meat suppliers are trying to make it so they animals that they are raising eat corn. They are even using this practice on salmon, which are normally carnivorous animals. By doing this it probably saves money for the companies it self, corn being a much cheaper supply than another that would be needed to feed the animals. However by doing this it affecting the diet of the people who eat these animals. Besides the actually animal you ingest you are also getting nutrients from what the animal itself has eaten. If the animals by large amount of suppliers have only eaten corn then the people ingesting the animals are eating large amount of corn, changing their diet in a way that they are not aware of. If the animal was eating the foods that it would consume if it was not in captivity the humans consuming this animal would get these nutrients passes to them, bus since the animals are not eating this way, the humans are not receiving this. I feel like this specific information is kept from the public because if consumers were to know this, then they would most likely buy from meat suppliers that are not following this corn trend, causing the ones who do to lose massive amounts of business. The producer of this knowledge should have the responsibility to tell people what they are feeding their animals and how it affects their everyday diet. However that will not happen, for it would lead to them losing business. As a knower of this information I have the responsibility of sharing it with others, if I chose to do so.

how do we know what we know?

"How do we Know what we Know? What evidence do you have to support your claim?"
We know what we know because of what we have been told, and because of what we have experianced. We learn what we know from the people who teach it to us. From birth we are taught how to live and to be succsefull in life and society. We go to school where we learn facts and history. We also learn what we known through experiance. We can taste a certain type of food and know what it taste like, and know that the next time you taste it it will have the same taste (unless it has gone bad or something to that account). From experiance you know that when you touch ice it wil be cold, and whenever you touch it again it will still be cold. We know what we know because we rely on the fact that the reality that we see is what is real. Some people question whether "reality" itself is just a very complex dream. But by beliving in the facts thats are told to us when we are young and learning, and when we are experiancing life we belive in the facts that what we know. There is no possible way to prove if every single thing that we know is actually true, but human nature is to belive in the reality that is infront of them. Yes people do question whether the reality that they see is true. However they know what they know by excepting facts that are taught to them.

Do Parents Matter?

How would Gladwell respond to the identity question from August 27th? How would Levitt and Dubner respond?

I feel like Gladwell would respond to the identity question from august 27 by saying that we are our location. Gladwell talks mostly about how peers are what influences a person’s identity, and who they truly are. Gladwell mentions that a child who is born in poverty and in a place in which is full of poverty the child is more likely to be suitable to trouble and likely hood of dropping out of school. Where you live has a lot to do with the type of people you are going to encounter, according to Gladwell. Using the example that if a child is raised in a poor neighbor hood or environment the child is more likely to get in to trouble can also be an affection of the peers that the child would meet in this location. If what Gladwell is saying is true than a child being raised in that type of environment would be influenced by his or her peers of that environment. Making a child it's location. I feel that Levitt and Dubner would respond by saying that we are our family. They seem to believe that is our genes that make us who we are. If we have intelligent parents then we are most likely going to be intelligent. According to them our personality, and ultimately who we are comes from our family, the genes that have been passed down. They believe that when the parent is younger, and setting up patterns in their life on how they handle situations is what affects the child. Not whether or not they listen to Mozart in the womb or not. I do agree with this. i belive that our genes make up a huge part of who we are, but the rest that cannot be decided by genes alone is based on your peers. The people who you hang out with tend to be like you. There is no way that you can possibly interact with someone your own age and not be influenced by thier actions. Whether or not they influnece you not to be like them or not to do something or to be like them they are still influencing you, therefore becoming a part of who you are. I belive that parents do not have as much influence on a child or person as much as thier peers do. A parent is around thier child a significantly less amount of time than they are with thier friends, leaving more time for them to be influenced by them. For example high school cliques are not formed by parents telling them to fit into a certain sterio type, they are made and fit into by the influence of thier friends and how they present them selves.