The Philosophy of Knowledge: What It Means to Truly “Know” and “Remember”
For the explorer, a mere collection of facts is not enough. The ultimate question is not just how to remember, but what it means to truly “know” something. This is a question that has occupied philosophers for centuries. The distinction between rote memorization and true understanding is not just a matter of technique; it is a fundamental philosophical difference that impacts how we learn and live.
In philosophy, the most widely accepted definition of knowledge is Justified True Belief. This means that to “know” something, you must believe it, it must be true, and you must have a justification for that belief. For example, if you memorize that a certain battle was in a certain year, you have a belief and it might be true. But do you know it? According to this definition, you only truly know it if you can justify it—if you can explain the causes, the context, and the consequences of that battle.
Rote memorization is a belief without justification. You have a fact in your mind, but you can’t explain why it is true or how it fits into a larger context. This is what makes rote memorization fragile and shallow. The moment you are asked a question that requires a deeper understanding, the belief falls apart.
In contrast, the memorization techniques for studying that we have explored in this guide are tools for building justification. A Memory Palace doesn’t just store a fact; it stores it in a web of contextual and spatial cues. The Feynman Technique forces you to explain a concept in your own words, which is a form of justification. Spaced repetition solidifies the memory, which is part of what makes the belief durable.
The explorer understands that the ultimate goal is not to have a mind full of facts but a mind full of interconnected knowledge. By engaging with these techniques, you are not just a student of a subject; you are a philosopher of knowledge, building a deeper and more durable understanding of the world.
Common FAQ about the Philosophy of Knowledge
1. Is “knowledge” the same as “information”? No. Information is raw data. Knowledge is information that has been processed, understood, and integrated into a mental model.
2. Can I have a “true belief” that is not knowledge? Yes. You can believe something that is true, but if you have no justification for it, it is not considered knowledge. It is a lucky guess.
3. Does this mean I shouldn’t memorize facts? No. Facts are the building blocks of knowledge. The key is to not stop at memorizing the fact. The goal is to build a justification for it.
4. How does this apply to skills, like playing an instrument? With a skill, you can have a “true belief” that you can play a certain note, but you only “know” it when you can justify your ability to play it consistently and correctly.
5. What is the role of memory in this philosophical view? Memory is a necessary but not sufficient condition for knowledge. You must remember a fact to know it, but you must do more than just remember it.
6. Can a machine have knowledge? This is a subject of great debate in philosophy and computer science. While a machine can store and process vast amounts of information, it is not clear if it can have a “belief” or “justification” in the human sense.
7. Is a feeling the same as a justification? No. A feeling is a subjective experience. A justification is a rational reason for a belief.
8. How can I apply this to my studies? After you learn a new fact, don’t just move on. Ask yourself, “Why is this true? How does this relate to other things I know?” The act of asking and answering these questions is a form of justification.
9. Is this concept new? No. The concept of Justified True Belief dates back to ancient Greek philosophers like Plato.
10. What’s the main takeaway for the explorer? Don’t just fill your mind with information; build a library of interconnected knowledge. The ultimate reward of learning is not just the facts you acquire, but the deeper understanding you gain.