Knowledge and Emotion: Opinions?

[Trixxi]

In TOK class, we recently discussed this quote:

"There can be no knowledge without emotion...until we have felt the force of the knowledge, it is not ours." (adapted from Arnold Bennett)

Could somebody please explain this vision of the relationship between knowledge and emotion? I'm pretty confused...

[bLub]

Well, I think...

firstly, there's "objective" knowledge - this comes from science etc, things that you can "prove"

then there's "subjective" knowledge - which comes from sense perception and emotion.

I think the quote means that even if you have the "prove", i.e. the objective knowledge, you cannot be certain that it is true unless you "feel" it, because knowledge needs to be objective AND subjective... does that make sense? I hope this isn't too far off your question...

[sweetnsimple786]

A common definition of knowledge is justified, true belief. The belief and justification are tied with emotion, one can argue. I think emotion influences the other ways of knowing so that the cornerstone to our justifications comes partly from our emotions. & we need some kind of conviction--I can't 'know' something if I don't think it's true.

[Charizard]

As for the relationship between knowledge and emotion, the Ways of Knowing (aka the ways to justify belief) are emotion, reason, perception and language. I think this quote is stressing the importance of emotion as a Way of Knowing. Emotion does influence the other Ways of Knowing but it is generally considered to be an obstacle to knowledge in those cases; I quote from the TOK textbook:

• "Our perception of things can be coloured by strong emotions, and there is doubtless some truth in sayings like 'love is blind' and 'fear has many eyes'. Such emotional colouring can make us aware of some aspects of reality to the exclusion of others. If for example, you are in love with someone you are likely to be blind to their faults; whereas if you loathe them you are likely to see only their faults."
• "Reason can also be negatively affected by our emotions, and if you hold your beliefs with too much passion, this can prevent you being open-minded and lead to a 'my theory right or wrong' attitude."
• "A person in the grip of a powerful emotion is likely to use slanted and emotive language."

But as a Way of Knowing on its own, it is doubtlessly quite important. A distinction must be made between the existence of emotion and the ability to control it; in the example of Mr Spock from Star Trek, he doesn't lack emotions but rather is in control of them. As such, emotion plays an important role in our ability to make rational decisions, by narrowing down our options so that we can choose between a manageable number of them. There's also a lot to be said about the role of intuition in relation to perception etc.

Personally I would have debated the quote if I were in your class: emotion is not the sole Way of Knowing, and I believe that we can "have" our own knowledge via the other Ways of Knowing. Can you really say that knowledge you came to using reason isn't really your knowledge because you haven't felt an emotive "force"?

[ameatypie]

Plato defined knowledge as justififed true belief, and to believe something at least there must be emotions behind it. to justify something, you also need emotion in many cases. So, their cannnot be knowledge without emotion.