What is Knowledge?

A Crash-Course in Epistemology

By: J.-M. Kuczynski

Narrated by: J.-M. Kuczynski

Length: 26 mins

Publisher's summary

It is made clear what knowledge is and how we acquire it. It is also explained how we can have knowledge of the future, the past, the possible, the imperceptible, and the non-existent. The Gettier problem is solved, and it is proved that we have a prior knowledge, as well as knowledge of non-trivial but purely analytic truths.

©2016 John-Michael Kuczynski (P)2017 John-Michael Kuczynski

Well-written and narrated, but not 100% sound

He does a really good job of conveying his understanding of epistemology, and this is a pretty good introduction to the subject. The presentation of the initial ideas was so clear that the problems actually jumped out at me. It would take too long to explain his conception and theory up to this point, but I'll try to make clear how I think it could be improved anyways.

It makes better sense to consider knowledge to be a special kind of belief. Namely, one that is taken to be certain.

All experience is based on the translation of sensation into information. So, our experience holds a relationship to the "real world", but we do not have first hand knowledge of the world. Knowledge is propositional (as he says), and this type of experience is something else. What we can do, and what the sciences suggest we should do, is to realize that we have a "sensational interface" with the world (while we indeed are also part of the world), but we do not experience sensation that corresponds perfectly to the reality that it represents. There's an interaction between the ultimate external reality (of experience, not to say we're not in a simulation or something) that occurs between it and a part of itself. The part cannot contain the whole. Something needs to be sacrificed. Maybe it's the synthetic/analytic distinction; it certainly doesn't follow in the way that he explains it to.

I've gotta go now, and I probably won't update this. Fun things to think about though, and I still recommend the listen.

superb

Where does What is Knowledge? rank among all the audiobooks you’ve listened to so far?

1

What was one of the most memorable moments of What is Knowledge??

the distinction between knowledge and awareness

What does J.-M. Kuczynski bring to the story that you wouldn’t experience if you just read the book?

he's the author, he's the master. he brings mastery to it

Was there a moment in the book that particularly moved you?

i liked the analysis of skepticism

Any additional comments?

there's a lot of good stuff in this book

crisp and brilliant

Would you consider the audio edition of What is Knowledge? to be better than the print version?

yes, it is discursive, but you still have to hear it, a bit like plato,i suppose. like a semi-spontaneous lecture, but cohesive.

Who was your favorite character and why?

the author. the only character, but i like him!

What about J.-M. Kuczynski’s performance did you like?

the forthrightness. the controlled passion.

What’s the most interesting tidbit you’ve picked up from this book?

that information-transmission is the basis of sensory knowledge

Any additional comments?

i like the distinction between knowledge and awareness, and the mileage the author gets out of it

Brilliant; master at work

The analysis of skepticism was brilliant particularly the section on the Gettier problem. It was a treat to hear the author narrate his own work with this one. It's apparent Dr. Kuczynski is the foremost expert on Epistemology. The concise and informative book brilliantly defines what knowledge is and how we acquire it. My favorite part was when he touched on the imperceptible, and the non-existent. The performance for the narration was extremely easy to listen to. And the content was invaluable.

Huh?

I was completely lost from the very first sentence. Not at all easy to follow. More confused than before listening.

Confusing!

I bought this book so I would hopefully get a better understanding of epistemology. I am driving to work and thought that I would be able to drive to work and listen to this book. I am so confused by the first chapter. I am not even sure if the person that is talking is real. The Voice came over as automated. It did not come across as real and I thought that it was an epistemology crash course. I stopped listening at chapter 2. I will however continue to read or listen to the rest of this book, but I felt the need to convey how I felt about this book.