[lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- From: Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:26:54 -0800
I wrote
Why do you want to know things, in general? is a strange question. Why
do you want to know how to change a light bulb, or what the
conjugation of 'savoir' [is] won't ordinarily be puzzling. Why do you want
to know anything at all? seems hopeless.
John wrote
It's a strange question, but not a bad one. I take on board Professor
Paul's comment that the answer will often be specific. When knowledge
has an instrumental value, failure to know may imply the inability to
perform the task at hand. And Walter is right that, logically
speaking, the answers suggested have nothing to do with the epistemic
quality of knowledge.
Next come the hedgehog and the fox, I suppose, along with those who
are neither but seem related to one or the other; one whose specialty
is a rare butterfly species; a would-be jeopardy contestant. Perhaps
more interesting is the autistic mathematical savant, Daniel Tammet,
who recently recited the values of Pi to the 22,514th place from
memory; who knows seven natural languages and has 'invented' a language
of his own. In reading about him one has the sense that he somehow cannot
help knowing things (all the while delighting in what he knows).
'Tammet is softly spoken, and shy about making eye contact, which makes him
seem younger than he is. He lives on the Kent coast, but never goes
near the beach--there are too many pebbles to count. The thought of a
mathematical problem with no solution makes him feel uncomfortable.
Trips to the supermarket are always a chore. "There's too much mental
stimulus. I have to look at every shape and texture. Every price, and
every arrangement of fruit and vegetables. So instead of
thinking,'What cheese do I want this week?', I'm just really
uncomfortable."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,,1409903,00.html
It may be that Hammett is Super Fox, in that he needs to know
everything (and hence very many things). But I've intentionally
digressed.
I said that 'Why do you want to know things in general?' was a strange
question. John replied that it was not a bad one. No, it isn't; except
that I have really no idea what would count as an answer to it. Beyond
knowing things that are of practical importance, why should I want to
know anything at all? Alas, I just do, in that I find these things
(Hume's thoughts on the uniformity of nature; why many French words
have a circumflex over their first vowel) interesting. 'Interesting'!
'What kind of a deep answer is that?!!' For thousands of years people
who have wanted to inquire into things 'of no practical importance'
have been ridiculed for that very thing. And, having noted this, I'm
no further along in answering this strange question.
They may yet have some pedagogical value [says John]. How does one
answer a student who asks, "Why do I have to know that?" Or a
legislator or
funding agency that asks, "Why should this be taught or researched?"
Luckily, I've never ever had a student ask that, and I don't deal with
legislatures or funding agencies. Could I though honestly say to the
sceptical student that knowing it will make her somehow a better
person? I'd hesitate to; yet this answer is as justified as the
scepticism behind the question. As for legislatures, the growing
demand that schools speak of their students as 'consumers' and testify
as to what having taken such and such a course in such and such a
department will yield by way of quantifiable 'results,' is spreading.
It is pernicious and silly but it is spreading, nonetheless.
In the end, all knowledge is either knowledge of..., or knowledge
that..., although these are shifty categories. So, I cannot 'just
know' (without knowing something) any more than I can just 'create'
without making something, no matter how insignificant. The 'strange
question' is strange for just that reason: it appears to assume that
there is something like 'just knowing.' I'm sure I haven't understood
it.
Finally: the trouble with commentators on Foucault who look to
Aristotle for support is that too often theirs is a fictional Aristotle.
Robert Paul
The Reed Institute
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
- Follow-Ups:
- [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- From: Robert Paul
- [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- From: Robert Paul
- [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- From: John McCreery
- [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- From: Walter Okshevsky
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
Why do you want to know things, in general? is a strange question. Why do you want to know how to change a light bulb, or what the conjugation of 'savoir' [is] won't ordinarily be puzzling. Why do you want to know anything at all? seems hopeless.
It's a strange question, but not a bad one. I take on board Professor Paul's comment that the answer will often be specific. When knowledge has an instrumental value, failure to know may imply the inability to perform the task at hand. And Walter is right that, logically speaking, the answers suggested have nothing to do with the epistemic quality of knowledge.
funding agency that asks, "Why should this be taught or researched?"
- [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- From: Robert Paul
- [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- From: Robert Paul
- [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- From: John McCreery
- [lit-ideas] Re: What, then, is wanting to know?
- From: Walter Okshevsky