if we assume that all empirical knowledge is
observational knowledge and what is observed -
is a contingent reality
are we assuming that if x is contingent x is
observable?
and x is observable x is contingent?
here our notion of contingency is based on our
theory of knowledge and our theory of
knowledge based on contingency
an epistemology and an ontology that entail
each other
the problem with this though is that the world
is greater than its knowledge
so for such a marriage to work - it need be assumed
that empirical knowledge cannot cover all the ground
so - here a reason to doubt empiricism
the window of opportunity for - non-empirical knowledge -
the dreaded a priori - like a dictator's hand
or
what?
the recognition that empirical knowledge -
indeed that knowledge - whatever your
view is by its nature limited
that yes - in a sense we know (within certain
parameters) but beyond these - is what is not known -
in empirical terms - is not observed - or cannot
be observed
and this is just the nature of it
without such a limitation - the limitation of the
unknown - there is no knowledge - of any kind
OK
what this suggests is that some sanity is put into
the issue if we take a step back and have a think -
what does observational - empirical knowledge tell
us about the world?
well first up it tells us - what we observe
this though on the face of it is everything -
on reflection is in fact - nothing
what we see - that is the nature of it -
is strictly speaking another question
we can say the world is what is observable -
are you happy with this?
beyond this statement is just - what?
quite clearly the unknown
that is if you want to push it - to further define -
the observable - you as it were - have to start again -
either that - or bite down hard and assume you have
everything for the journey
what I think has happened in empiricism - is a switch -
we jump from epistemology to ontology -
as if we haven't moved
voila - what we are talking about now - is contingency
(has quite a solid ring to it)
however nothing is actually really gained -
just an impression of foundation -
foundation to observation
and ontology for your knowledge
thank you sir
my point is - yes - knowledge is knowledge of -
but in this case it is knowledge of the observable
but truly
again if you want to elaborate here - what is -
the observable
who is to say?
