Knowledge is inherent in the mind. It doesn't exist alone. To change what knowledge is would mean changing the way humans think. Is that your question?

So I would like subconscious mechanisms to be closer to the foreground of our minds, not stuck in the background operating subliminally and occassionally delivering a Freudian slip or memorable dream.

Imagine that you were given the power to shape reality, to preside over creation itself. Imagine that your ideals became truth the very moment they were born. If you could determine what knowledge was--if you could create knowedge--what would you have it be? There are no rules: you are the rule. What would you make knowledge comprise?

Ask, and ye shall recieve!! Ye cannot ask amiss in this devilish game.

Tell me more, my friends. Unpack your hearts with words. Confess your longings, lest ye be accounted unworthy of wisdom! Only true LOVERS may enter by the door.

To be honest knowledge is simply belief, not justified (never absolute) and clearly untrue (perception/language = reality is a false supposition).

You think it is untrue that Quito is the capital of Ecuador, and that I know that Quito is the capital of Ecuador? I suggest you look it up, just as I did.

Knowledge would be fruit on a tree in a garden, and I would eat it.

Knowledge, were it to be whatever I wanted it to be, would be the infinite self-perception of an infinite Self, an infinite Truth.

Doobah47 wrote:

To be honest knowledge is simply belief, not justified (never absolute) and clearly untrue (perception/language = reality is a false supposition).

You think it is untrue that Quito is the capital of Ecuador, and that I know that Quito is the capital of Ecuador? I suggest you look it up, just as I did.

I am with thee Doobah47, until reality as a false supposition. Now, reality is reality, and reality is our concept by the same name, and our perception of reality, while always flawed and incomplete, is not all there is to reality. An idea as an abstraction is by nature incomplete, but in this sense it like a box of tools a few tools short, which is to say, no idea serves every purpose or tells the complete truth, and telling involves another level of abstraction with a greater degree of difficulty. I concieve of ideas not to tell truth, or to transmit knowledge, but to aid understanding. If we could not put the parts and pieces of reality in some relationship to each other through ideas we could not understand it in the least or manipulate it at all.

Doobah47 wrote:

To be honest knowledge is simply belief, not justified (never absolute) and clearly untrue (perception/language = reality is a false supposition).

You think it is untrue that Quito is the capital of Ecuador, and that I know that Quito is the capital of Ecuador? I suggest you look it up, just as I did.

Although one can say that a fact is correct, in 'knowing' (know in your sense, the common concept of knowing) you fail to comprehend anything other than a piece of language, what you 'know' is the word and not Quito. In my concept of knowing, in order to know that Quito is x you must have an intuitive subconscious awareness and deep felt understanding of Quito (the place) in order to 'know' anything about Quito.

kennethamy wrote:

I am with thee Doobah47, until reality as a false supposition. .

You've misread. I didn't mean that reality is a false supposition, i meant that 'perception/language = reality' is a false supposition. the technical words of my statement might be incorrect (ie supposition/theory/formula).

What I think is that in order for any statement to be true then the language must be equal to the reality, and that is never possible.