What is it to know?
The question ‘what is it to know?’ has been alive for me for some time. I imagine this note will be the first in an ongoing series on the topic.
I’ll start with one framework I consider foundational - John Vervaeke’s delineation of the four types of knowing.
Propositional Knowing - this is knowing that something is true. The knowing of facts, beliefs, and ideas.
Procedural Knowing - this is knowing how to do something. The knowing of practical skills and abilities.
Perspectival Knowing - this is knowing through the embodied sense of what it is to be me here, now. The knowing that comes from seeing through a particular point of view.
Participatory Knowing - this is knowing through relationship with the world - as an agent fitted to an arena. Knowing, in the sense of having fluency and ease with, the relational space in and between the world and me. This is where we come to know a sense of home and meaning. To know here is to be grounded.1
The four types of knowing could be considered layers of knowing, with participatory being the most fundamental layer upon which all else is built. As Vervaeke says:
“Participatory knowing generates affordances. Perspectival knowing selects which ones are salient to me, that enter into my salience landscaping, that I’m going to act upon. As I get that situational awareness, I know which skills, which procedures to engage. And as I do that, I start to get evidence about general patterns, I start to form propositions about facts.”2
While propositional knowing is often given the most regard in our society, it is actually the most superficial layer of knowing.
We get ourselves into trouble when we hold the propositional above the non-propositional (procedural, perspectival, participatory) - that is to say, when we flip the order of import. Right relationship to the propositional involves using it in service of the non-propositional.
We also get ourselves into trouble when we disconnect the propositional from the non-propositional. This disconnection is why, for instance, teachers of ethics aren’t any more ethical than everyone else.3
Thomas Hübl offers the distinction between 'speaking about life' and 'speaking from life'. In 'speaking about life’, the propositional is detached from the non-propositional. ‘Speaking about’, as Thomas suggests, is both a reflection and cause of a global health crisis.
In contrast, to 'speak from' is to speak words that come from a place of self contact and relationship with the non-propositional dimensions of knowing. Orienting toward ‘speaking from life’ is an orientation toward connecting the propositional with the non-propositional - an orientation toward integration and coherence.4
In the scene below from Good Will Hunting, Robin Williams highlights the distinction between propositional and non-propositional knowing. Further, he demonstrates that the participatory realm is where we come to know love and meaning.
I realize the term ‘grounded’ is undefined here and might come across as ambiguous. In a later note, I’d like to say more on this and ask the question - ‘what does it mean to be grounded?’
On coherence: The more we treat a part as though it is separate from the larger whole (consciously or unconsciously), the more we move toward pain or dysfunction.
The better we come to know the relatedness of the parts of the whole (while honoring the individuation of those parts), the more we move toward health, grace, and coherence.