Difference between ideas and knowledge?

I was wondering in case I'd get this question: Ass the claim that all ideas are from sense experience. And the same goes for knowledge. Are knolwedge and ideas the same?

Reply 1

im so academic

15

ideas = something that you think
knowledge = something that you know

Reply 2

Nuffles

19

Knowledge is something that can be proven by its definition. Like all bachelors are unmarried and the colour blue, is blue.

Ideas are like, things you get from your impressions. Impressions are vivid and forceful and ideas are weaker and duller. I think. Although it doesn't make much sense in relation to the exam question you put up..

Reply 3

Aesop

11

Nuffles

Knowledge is something that can be proven by its definition. Like all bachelors are unmarried and the colour blue, is blue.

Ideas are like, things you get from your impressions. Impressions are vivid and forceful and ideas are weaker and duller. I think. Although it doesn't make much sense in relation to the exam question you put up..

Some may claim that there is propositional knowledge that isn't simply a tautology however.

OP: Knowledge needs to be defined. I would suggest you take the triparte (true justified belief) definition as the basis for your comparison.

When you consider the difference between 'true justified belief' and an idea, you might see it a little clearer. There are many different positions to explore however.

Reply 4

spam.hello4

Ideas are neither true nor false; they exist only in the mind. For example, I may have an idea of God; it would be wrong to say that my idea of God is false.. or true.. because an idea is simply what I am thinking about and is not an actual statement about something.

If I were colour blind however, and were to say that 'that chair is red', it would be true to say that I have knowledge of that chairs colour. Due to me in the example being colour blind however, it is possible that my knowledge of the colour of the chair could be false, unlike my idea of the chair, because what I am seeing in my 'minds eye' can not be doubted and isnt actually making a real statement about anything.

Above, Kants view is mentioned that 'certainty is confined to introspection and the tauntological.' (introspection- looking inside oneself e.g. I can be certain that I am thinking about what I will write next in this response and this cannot be doubted) (tauntological- saying the same thing twice, e.g. the statement 'all swans are birds' has to be true because a swan, by definition, is a bird, so the statement is basically saying all birds are birds, which is obviously true.) Kant's view says that any knowledge that we can be certain about is meaningless, as it is obviously true (as is the case with the above examples).

However, there is also another type of knowledge that was not mentioned above, this is substantive knowledge (substantive- useful, can actually tell us something about the world.) Although we can not be certain about this type of knowledge, Kant argues that it is the only type of knowledge that will tell us anything meaningful. By saying this he implies that rationalism's account of knowledge is useless as it is confined to a very limited number of things.

So, in summary:
+ ideas are neither true nor false
+ knowledge is either true or false
+ ideas are in the mind
+ knowledge is based in the world
+ there are two types of knowledge
+ substantive knowledge is uncertain but it tells us useful things
+ knowledge that we are certain of ( not known by experience) is very limited