You Should Know

Intetesing. But doesn't that like forget about bad actors? People arguing in bad faith and so on?

Also it's obviously waay different if you "debate" someone on the internet vs someone say at work when eating together.

You can just frame this as semantics and pragmatics. I basically disagree with the premise of this branch of sociology and find it disrupts discourse and effective problem solving.

Another way of putting that would be, such nuance is the skin on the apple, not the whole apple. It can add a little extra to your analysis, but shouldn't be used as a cudgel to undermine the foundation.

So the first type is INT and the second type is WIS ?

I would argue that having facts without context isn't knowing. I accept the definition of knowledge to be justified true belief. Ultimately this is a probabilistic argument, Solipsism cannot be overcome so we can never absolutely know anything but phenomenologically it is best to assume our external reality exists and functions roughly the way we perceive it. With absolute knowledge out of reach we need a functional construction to serve in it's place. Justified true belief is as close to absolute knowledge as we can achieve. In this construct belief uses it's conventional definition, true means that it doesn't contradict reality as we perceive it, and justified means that we can point to strong evidence in our perceived reality to support the belief. Without at least some context the belief cannot be justified so the thing cannot be known.

Source: It was revealed to me in a dream.

This reminds me of the One Health approach to healthcare.

One Health is a collaborative, multisectoral, and transdisciplinary approach — working at the local, regional, national, and global levels — with the goal of achieving optimal health outcomes recognizing the interconnection between people, animals, plants, and their shared environment.

One example of this would be trying to curb antibiotic resistance. We have banned certain antibiotics for human use, but let veterinarians still use it for animals. Well humans aren't dumb and just went to a vet for the same antibiotic they're used to using which defeated the purpose of banning it for human use (to reserve it so resistance to it doesn't spread). An understanding of the connectedness of people and a bigger picture of antibiotics use was needed before policy should have been made.

This is really interesting. Without knowing there was a word for it, I've often found myself wishing people (including myslef at times) did a better job of the Connected Knowing approach.

There are unknown unknowns

Are you reinventing empathy?

Ways of learning absolutely do differ. I agree. Someone can follow a recipe on paper. Another might not get it on paper as quickly as they would with a video tutorial. Is one better than the other?

It is easy to fall into the world-view that what you know is the right way. Everyobe else does it that way. Easy. But the few who aren't in the everyone crowd could have different ways of seeong a situation.

I observe that so many conversations devolve into "you don't know? Idiot" too quickly. It's hard to learn when you being wrong leads to snobbery and gates.