I KNOW you DON’T KNOW, even though I don’t know what you claim to know – draft

even though I don’t know what you claim to know.

I confront this all the time.

Because of their
expertise, experience, special education, credentials
many persons claim detailed knowledge
that can be demonstrated they actually don’t know.
This is a condition that faces everyone,
as we all confuse knowledge and belief – to some extent.

But, there is a deeper issue:
Persons sometimes deny that there is
something to know or knowledge to be gained;
either it is impossible to know, or
we can’t learn it at this time, or
we don’t need to know it.

For some, this “missing” knowledge
is in a blindspot;
the category for their query doesn’t exist.
Yet, as for blindspots,
we are unaware of their existence;
there isn’t a gap, indicating something missing.
We confabulate and cover over the gap
with imaginary content.

The intent of this doc is to explore this blindspot.
But first, an exploration of the first mentioned type of not knowing,
personal and close to home.


Example, close to home:
My grandson has been addicted for a decade.
He can function at a regular job, and live a “normal” life;
but, it blocks further growth.
He desperately wants to be free,
and has tried detox & rehab, at some expense and pain, many times.

His mother, did get clean from a much worse addiction,
has been clean for over a decade,
works in the addiction rehab field, and
is currently in grad school to run her own clinic.

His grandmother earned advanced degrees in addiction treatment,
worked for many years at many levels in the field, but
has not had direct contact with the field in more than a decade.

Both, mother and grandmother,
insist that THEY know what their grandson needs
to be clean and stay clean.

Others, observing this phenomenon for a decade,
believe they may be functioning as enablers
for their grandson’s addiction:
which they vehemently deny in such force
that it cuts off all future dialog.

I was once addicted to tobacco, for 15 years;
even after being an aggressive non-smoker.
I started smoking cigarettes at Woodstock!
I was unable to stop smoking, after trying everything.
One day I remembered that when driving in the UK,
I had suddenly switched left & right, in an instant.
So, I instantly returned to be a non-smoker,
and since then never have the urge to smoke.

I have no substance addictions, but
I am “addicted” to many life-style routines,
which I find nearly impossible to change.
With 2 PhDs in physics and psychology,
I have some comprehension of evidence and knowledge claims.
I have read about substance addiction, but am no expert.

I am IGNORANT of substance additions and cures.
That is, I know OF what
I don’t yet know or comprehend, and what I can’t yet do or appreciate.
I know OF what I can learn if needed.

is an essential, positive concept
for the nu Humanity

About addiction:
My ignorance informs me there is great diversity
in how persons recover from addictions.
No one can claim that they know,
what is needed in a specific situation;
as with my grandson and his history of multiple failures.
Might it be that having a secure, safe haven
to return to if his rehab fails,
he gives-up when he should continue?
A solution is not to deny him safe haven,
but attend to this and seek a viable treatment;
that is not just a more expensive treatment center,
as are now being promoted by many experts as to what is needed.


Meta Comment:
Although many characterize my ideas as too “abstract”,
most of my conceptual schemes have application
in both the personal/local and the societal/global.
Indeed, conceptual schemes emerge
through a dialog of alternative applications.

This is consistent, with the concept of analogy/metaphor
being at the core of human comprehension. [Hofstadter]


Contemporary human discourse, on vital issues,
is dominated by many claims of knowledge
that are not confirmed;
yet acted upon as if THE truth, and the WHOLE truth.

Some of this claimed knowledge is useful,
when recognized as conditional.
Utility emerges through the interaction
of different conceptual schemes;
within meta-contexts, and
applied to specific situations or phenomena.
No single conceptual scheme has much utility.

This “philosophy” is quite simple
compared to the many complex philosophies
debated the past few decades and currently emergent,
of which I am quite IGNORANT.
Yet, to these philosophers, their ideas seem clear and simple.
The few occasions, when I have dipped into deep philosophy,
I have gained useful insights.
I also recognize that a “mind must be trained”
to read, study, and dialog on these conceptual schemes
at a level to gain adequate comprehension.
They are never memorized.

So I have learned, over decades of futile efforts
to share my insights and overall “worldview” with others,
that my “philosophy” is not “simple” to others.


 At this point, returning after a few hours, there are a great many different paths I might take. This is because the structure/organization of conceptual schemes are, in approximation both nested and networked, with a fractal-like quality. There are no preferred paths for learning conceptual schemes. As they are “conceptual”, they are only represented by semiotic structured fields (semfields), which can be observed and studied by all humans (although “conceptual” interpretations may differ).

I will let the title of this doc determine the path.

WHAT do we really KNOW,
that is distinguished from our BELIEFS ?

I address this to the best mind/brains in humankind,
who are not only concerned about our futures, but
are dedicated to making a significant contribution.

I could make a link to a list
of the names of such persons I know of,
which is a small percent of those who are out there.
I discover a few new persons-of-interest daily
and wonder why I hadn’t known of them before.

I am not seeking here
a comprehensive philosophy/theory of knowledge/belief.
I am seeking a pragmatic tool
to “pick the lock” of our “silo/cage”
so we can begin doing what we must do.

I observe a rapid increase (maybe exponential)
of quality dialog/conversation/discourse
on a growing multitude of topics/issues/projects/etc.,
all relevant to our present/future.

I observe nothing, even speculative,
of a scenario through what I call

That is, we need first draft stories
of how we synergize/collaborate/cooperate
to overcome our Crisis-of-Crises:
Societal Collapse & Catastrophic Climate Change,
and the multitude of other associated crises,
in the short time allotted.

Why the vacuum?
This is a query, not a question.
There are no short, simple answers.

This query has been at the top of my agenda
for almost five decades.
I have written what could be published
in a dozen large treatises;
and yet it would not be the needed STORY.

A story or scenario has to be experienced over time,
line reading a serial novel or viewing a video series.
I doubt whether a single novel or film would suffice.

Any specific version of this scenario
would be comprehended by only a small percent of the population.
Even if the first draft were to target 1 % of the global population,
it might probably need many variations.

The “resolution” to our “difficulty” may be that
the story cannot be “written”, as others are written.
That is, “we” must research this challenge,
to gain the knowledge and competencies
to develop scenarios and strategies for
the end game.

—– to be continued  06/27/2016

Author: nuet

01/24/1935. BS-physics RPI 1956; MS-physics UofChicago 1958; PhD-physics Yale 1965; PhD-Edu Psy Uof MInnesota 1970. Auroral Research Byrd Station, Antarctica 11/1960-02/1962. MINNEMAST curriculum dev 1964-68. Woodstock. faculty Pima Community College, Tucson 1974-1997. Transdisciplinary scientist, philosopher, educator, futurist, activist. PC user since 1982. "Wife". daughter, 2 grandsons. 5 dogs & 7 cats. Lacks mental imagery in all sensory domains.