Home > Reality > Epistemology — learning and knowing

Epistemology — learning and knowing

Reality is disclosed in language. A subject’s reality is language content: a set of items drawn from the shared language tools, held in a relational set. To see a chair is to have items from the common toolkit — chair, table, sit, leg, room — assembled in their relations. The experiencing is that relational labelling, given from a seat no one else occupies. The senses are not a wordless floor beneath this: they come into view only on inquiry, when the subject turns to ask how it came to see what it saw — and what inquiry finds is itself more content, drawn from the same tools. There is no layer one could reach behind the content to stand on.

This is the disclosive starting point — reality showing itself to a subject already in the midst of it — and from it the rest follows: knowing is private, there is no view from nowhere, and what holds true is not mirrored from outside but built. Where each of these turns up across philosophy, and where SPLectrum carries it, is read across the field in close affinity.

Learning, and knowledge

Experience is private — the content is worked from one’s own seat — but the tools are common. We are always already equipped with the shared toolkit, because we always belong; private experience is the use of common tools to deliver content. And because we belong, we share: the content is expressed, taken up by others, and fed back into the shared tools, refining and adding to them. Those shared tools are our knowledge — not a private recognition held in one head, but the common toolkit, built and held together.

The dynamic of learning is convergence, and it is nothing exotic. It is the same dynamic by which we come to agree on the meaning of a word in our common language: no one issues the meaning from outside, no two of us hold it identically, yet through use and exchange we converge closely enough to share it. This is not the pragmatist’s convergence of inquiry — it sits a layer deeper, in the common tools that any inquiry already runs on: we converge on the meaning of a word before we can converge on anything said with it. And it is no licence for anything-goes — though not because convergence answers to a truth outside it. A whole community can converge on what proves false, and that is the ordinary condition of knowing, not a breakdown of it; the discipline is the coupling itself — one cannot privately decide a word means whatever one likes and still be understood. There is no absolute objectivity standing over the convergence to certify it — converged subjectivity is the only objectivity there is, stable enough to rely on, common enough to share, and always open to the next experience that does not fit. The shared store grows richer, the next private experience has more to work with, and the evolution of a shared reality runs on.

See also: The core values and the metaphysics they disclose · Aesthetics — the dynamics of meaning · Discovery · Epistemology (close affinity) — where this account is read across the field