Common knowledge

Last updated

Common knowledge is knowledge that is publicly known by everyone or nearly everyone, usually with reference to the community in which the knowledge is referenced. [1] Common knowledge can be about a broad range of subjects, such as science, literature, history, or entertainment. [1] Since individuals often have different knowledge bases, common knowledge can vary and it may sometimes take large-scale studies to know for certain what is common knowledge amongst large groups of people. [2] Often, common knowledge does not need to be cited. [3] Common knowledge is distinct from general knowledge.

Contents

In broader terms, common knowledge is used to refer to information that an agent would accept as valid, such as information that multiple users may know. [2] Assigning something the label of common knowledge requires certain considerations about the involved community, group, society and/or individuals, the time period, and the location. [1]

Variation

Defining something as common knowledge can differ based on circumstances because there are variations in what is considered common knowledge amongst different groups. [3] The variation can come from the time period, culture, population, class, age, demographic, and other circumstances. For example, The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution might be considered common knowledge among people residing in the United States of a certain age, but cannot be considered common knowledge when considering the general population of other countries.

Instability

Common knowledge is not always stable, and can shift over time to create new common knowledge. Knowledge that was once considered common knowledge amongst a group, society, or community might later become known as false. For example, for centuries it was common knowledge in Europe that the Sun revolved around the Earth, but after years of arguments, it is now common knowledge that the Earth revolves around the Sun. [4]

Large scale

On a larger global scale, it is not possible to define almost any knowledge as common knowledge because it is difficult to know how far a fact has spread in global populations without large-scale global population studies. [2] For example, the current president of the United States might be considered common knowledge in much of the world because of the power associated with that position, but one cannot assume that there is global recognition of this fact as common knowledge without further research into the knowledge of global populations.

Common belief

It is hard to define fact from belief and thus there are scholars who prefer to separate common knowledge from common belief. Common belief is something that is more easily defined because the requirement is only that a majority of people within a specific group, community, or society believe something to be true whereas common knowledge must meet this requirement and also prove that the belief is a fact.

Examples

Other settings

Many techniques have been developed in response to the question of distinguishing truth from fact in matters that have become "common knowledge". Techniques for how to shape common knowledge can vary through professional settings.

In legal settings, rules of evidence generally exclude hearsay, which may draw on "facts" someone believes to be "common knowledge". [5] The use of common knowledge in law varies between countries. [5]

See also

Further reading

Related Research Articles

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with knowledge. Epistemologists study the nature, origin, and scope of knowledge, epistemic justification, the rationality of belief, and various related issues. Debates in contemporary epistemology are generally clustered around four core areas:

Knowledge representation and reasoning is the field of artificial intelligence (AI) dedicated to representing information about the world in a form that a computer system can use to solve complex tasks such as diagnosing a medical condition or having a dialog in a natural language. Knowledge representation incorporates findings from psychology about how humans solve problems and represent knowledge, in order to design formalisms that will make complex systems easier to design and build. Knowledge representation and reasoning also incorporates findings from logic to automate various kinds of reasoning.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pseudoscience</span> Unscientific claims wrongly presented as scientific

Pseudoscience consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that claim to be both scientific and factual but are incompatible with the scientific method. Pseudoscience is often characterized by contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; absence of systematic practices when developing hypotheses; and continued adherence long after the pseudoscientific hypotheses have been experimentally discredited. It is not the same as junk science.

Social epistemology refers to a broad set of approaches that can be taken in epistemology that construes human knowledge as a collective achievement. Another way of characterizing social epistemology is as the evaluation of the social dimensions of knowledge or information.

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. People display this bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information, or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes. The effect is strongest for desired outcomes, for emotionally charged issues, and for deeply entrenched beliefs. Confirmation bias is insuperable for most people, but they can manage it, for example, by education and training in critical thinking skills.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ammonium</span> Chemical compound

The ammonium cation is a positively charged polyatomic ion with the chemical formula NH+4 or [NH4]+. It is formed by the protonation of ammonia. Ammonium is also a general name for positively charged (protonated) substituted amines and quaternary ammonium cations, where one or more hydrogen atoms are replaced by organic or other groups. Not only is ammonium a source of nitrogen and a key metabolite for many living organisms, but it is an integral part of the global nitrogen cycle. As such, the human impact in recent years could have an effect on the biological communities that depend on it.

A belief is a subjective attitude that a proposition is true or a state of affairs is the case. A subjective attitude is a mental state of having some stance, take, or opinion about something. In epistemology, philosophers use the term "belief" to refer to attitudes about the world which can be either true or false. To believe something is to take it to be true; for instance, to believe that snow is white is comparable to accepting the truth of the proposition "snow is white". However, holding a belief does not require active introspection. For example, few individuals carefully consider whether or not the sun will rise tomorrow, simply assuming that it will. Moreover, beliefs need not be occurrent, but can instead be dispositional.

An epistemic community is a network of professionals with recognized knowledge and skill in a particular issue-area. They share a set of beliefs, which provide a value-based foundation for the actions of members. Members of an epistemic community also share causal beliefs, which result from their analysis of practices that contribute to set of problems in their issue-area that then allow them to see the multiple links between policy and outcomes. Third, they share notions of validity, or internationally defined criteria for validating knowledge in their area of know-how. However, the members are from all different professions. Epistemic communities also have a common set of practices associated with a set of problems towards which their professional knowledge is directed, because of the belief that human welfare will benefit as a result. Communities evolve independently and without influence of authority or government. They do not have to be large; some are made up of only a few members. Even non-members can have an influence on epistemic communities. However, if the community loses consensus, then its authority decreases.

Magical thinking, or superstitious thinking, is the belief that unrelated events are causally connected despite the absence of any plausible causal link between them, particularly as a result of supernatural effects. Examples include the idea that personal thoughts can influence the external world without acting on them, or that objects must be causally connected if they resemble each other or have come into contact with each other in the past. Magical thinking is a type of fallacious thinking and is a common source of invalid causal inferences. Unlike the confusion of correlation with causation, magical thinking does not require the events to be correlated.

Empirical evidence for a proposition is evidence, i.e. what supports or counters this proposition, that is constituted by or accessible to sense experience or experimental procedure. Empirical evidence is of central importance to the sciences and plays a role in various other fields, like epistemology and law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supervenience</span> Relation between sets of properties or facts

In philosophy, supervenience refers to a relation between sets of properties or sets of facts. X is said to supervene on Y if and only if some difference in Y is necessary for any difference in X to be possible.

The identity of indiscernibles is an ontological principle that states that there cannot be separate objects or entities that have all their properties in common. That is, entities x and y are identical if every predicate possessed by x is also possessed by y and vice versa. It states that no two distinct things can be exactly alike, but this is intended as a metaphysical principle rather than one of natural science. A related principle is the indiscernibility of identicals, discussed below.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cluster analysis</span> Grouping a set of objects by similarity

Cluster analysis or clustering is the task of grouping a set of objects in such a way that objects in the same group are more similar to each other than to those in other groups (clusters). It is a main task of exploratory data analysis, and a common technique for statistical data analysis, used in many fields, including pattern recognition, image analysis, information retrieval, bioinformatics, data compression, computer graphics and machine learning.

In planning and policy, a wicked problem is a problem that is difficult or impossible to solve because of incomplete, contradictory, and changing requirements that are often difficult to recognize. It refers to an idea or problem that cannot be fixed, where there is no single solution to the problem; and "wicked" denotes resistance to resolution, rather than evil. Another definition is "a problem whose social complexity means that it has no determinable stopping point". Moreover, because of complex interdependencies, the effort to solve one aspect of a wicked problem may reveal or create other problems. Due to their complexity, wicked problems are often characterized by organized irresponsibility.

In artificial intelligence research, commonsense knowledge consists of facts about the everyday world, such as "Lemons are sour", or "Cows say moo", that all humans are expected to know. It is currently an unsolved problem in Artificial General Intelligence. The first AI program to address common sense knowledge was Advice Taker in 1959 by John McCarthy.

Standpoint theory, also known as standpoint epistemology, is a foundational framework in social theory that examines how individuals' unique perspectives, shaped by their social and political experiences, influence their understanding of the world. Standpoint theory proposes that authority is rooted in individuals' personal knowledge and perspectives and the power that such authority exerts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Infinite regress</span> Philosophical problem

An infinite regress is an infinite series of entities governed by a recursive principle that determines how each entity in the series depends on or is produced by its predecessor.

Aumann's agreement theorem was stated and proved by Robert Aumann in a paper titled "Agreeing to Disagree", which introduced the set theoretic description of common knowledge. The theorem concerns agents who share a common prior and update their probabilistic beliefs by Bayes' rule. It states that if the probabilistic beliefs of such agents, regarding a fixed event, are common knowledge then these probabilities must coincide. Thus, agents cannot agree to disagree, that is have common knowledge of a disagreement over the posterior probability of a given event.

Dynamic epistemic logic (DEL) is a logical framework dealing with knowledge and information change. Typically, DEL focuses on situations involving multiple agents and studies how their knowledge changes when events occur. These events can change factual properties of the actual world : for example a red card is painted in blue. They can also bring about changes of knowledge without changing factual properties of the world : for example a card is revealed publicly to be red. Originally, DEL focused on epistemic events. We only present in this entry some of the basic ideas of the original DEL framework; more details about DEL in general can be found in the references.

Definitions of knowledge try to determine the essential features of knowledge. Closely related terms are conception of knowledge, theory of knowledge, and analysis of knowledge. Some general features of knowledge are widely accepted among philosophers, for example, that it constitutes a cognitive success or an epistemic contact with reality and that propositional knowledge involves true belief. Most definitions of knowledge in analytic philosophy focus on propositional knowledge or knowledge-that, as in knowing that Dave is at home, in contrast to knowledge-how (know-how) expressing practical competence. However, despite the intense study of knowledge in epistemology, the disagreements about its precise nature are still both numerous and deep. Some of those disagreements arise from the fact that different theorists have different goals in mind: some try to provide a practically useful definition by delineating its most salient feature or features, while others aim at a theoretically precise definition of its necessary and sufficient conditions. Further disputes are caused by methodological differences: some theorists start from abstract and general intuitions or hypotheses, others from concrete and specific cases, and still others from linguistic usage. Additional disagreements arise concerning the standards of knowledge: whether knowledge is something rare that demands very high standards, like infallibility, or whether it is something common that requires only the possession of some evidence.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Halpern, Joseph Y.; Moses, Yoram (1990-07-01). "Knowledge and common knowledge in a distributed environment". Journal of the ACM. 37 (3): 549–587. arXiv: cs/0006009 . doi:10.1145/79147.79161. ISSN   0004-5411. S2CID   52151232.
  2. 1 2 3 Geanakoplos, John (1992-11-01). "Common Knowledge". Journal of Economic Perspectives. 6 (4): 53–82. doi:10.1257/jep.6.4.53. ISSN   0895-3309.
  3. 1 2 Shi, Ling (2011). "Common Knowledge, Learning, and Citation Practices in University Writing". Research in the Teaching of English. 45 (3): 308–334. doi:10.58680/rte201113468. ISSN   0034-527X. JSTOR   40997768. S2CID   140445118.
  4. Theodossiou, E.; Danezis, E.; Manimanis, V.N.; Kalyva, E.M. (2002). "From Pythagoreans to Kepler: the dispute between the geocentric and the heliocentric systems". Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage. 5: 89–98. doi:10.3724/SP.J.1440-2807.2002.01.07. S2CID   256562413 via University of Athens.
  5. 1 2 Levi, Ron; Valverde, Mariana (2001). "Knowledge on Tap: Police Science and Common Knowledge in the Legal Regulation of Drunkenness". Law & Social Inquiry. 26 (4): 819–846. doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2001.tb00325.x. ISSN   0897-6546. S2CID   144058223.