Iโm obsessยญively interยญested in how to creยญate knowledge.
I love to learn about learnยญing. And I love to know about knowledge.
Of course, not everyยญone will find this interยญestยญing, but not all knowยญledge is creยญated equally. Understanding how knowยญledge is creยญated makes it easiยญer to underยญstand the strengths and weakยญnesses of difยญferยญent types of reasoning.
At least, I think so.
Here we go:
How To Create Knowledge
This list of how to creยญate knowยญledge presents aspects of reasยญonยญing, methยญodยญoยญloยญgicยญal approaches, data anaยญlysยญis perยญspectยญives, and philoยญsophยญicยญal frameยญworks. It explains how knowยญledge can be approached, anaยญlysed, and interpreted.
Albert Einstein
โIf you canยญโt explain it simply, you donโt underยญstand it well enough.โ
Types of Reasoning and Logical Processes
Inductive reasยญonยญing. Generalising from speยญcifยญic obserยญvaยญtions to broadยญer generalizations.
Deductive reasยญonยญing. Starting with a genยญerยญal stateยญment or hypoยญthesยญis and reachยญing a speยญcifยญic conclusion.
Abductive reasยญonยญing. Starting with an obserยญvaยญtion and seekยญing the simplest and most likely explanation.
Probabilistic reasยญonยญing. Making preยญdicยญtions based on probยญabยญilยญitยญies in uncerยญtain situations.
How to creยญate knowledge.
Methodological Approaches
Empirical vs logicยญal. EmpiricalโDeriving knowยญledge from obserยญvaยญtion or experยญiยญmentยญaยญtion. LogicalโUsing strucยญtured reasยญonยญing and valยญid arguยญments indeยญpendยญent of empirยญicยญal evidence.
Heuristic vs algorithmic. HeuristicโApplying pracยญticยญal methยญods or โrules of thumbโ for immeยญdiยญate soluยญtions. AlgorithmicโUsing sysยญtemยญatยญic proยญcedยญures for definยญitยญive, often optimยญal solutions.
Data and Analysis Perspectives
Analytical vs synยญthetยญic. AnalyticalโBreaking down comยญplex probยญlems into smalยญler comยญponยญents. SyntheticโCombining eleยญments to form a coherยญent whole.
Qualitative vs quantยญitยญatยญive. QualitativeโFocusing on non-statยญistยญicยญal aspects and qualยญitยญies. QuantitativeโInvolving numerยญicยญal data colยญlecยญtion and analysis.
Philosophical and Theoretical Frameworks
Rationalism vs empirยญiยญcism. RationalismโEmphasising reasยญon as the primary source of knowยญledge. EmpiricismโStressing the importยญance of sensยญory experยญiยญence and evidence.
Positivism. Asserting that sciยญentifยญic knowยญledge is the true form of knowledge.
Hermeneutics. Focusing on the interยญpretยญaยญtion of texts, lanยญguage, and symbols.
Phenomenology. Concentrating on the study of conยญsciousยญness and dirยญect experience.
Pragmatism. Considering pracยญticยญal conยญsequences as vital in meanยญing and truth.
Constructivism. Suggesting that knowยญledge is conยญstrucยญted from experยญiยญences and ideas.
Deconstruction. Analysing philoยญsophยญicยญal and litยญerยญary lanยญguage to uncovยญer impliยญcit assumptions.
We easยญily fall prey to the tricks our psyยญchoยญlogy plays on us. These โthinkยญing errorsโ exist because theyโve often aided our surยญvivยญal. However, knowยญing and underยญstandยญing variยญous types of comยญmon falยญlaยญcies and biases is helpยญful in everyยญday life.
Here are a few examples of logicยญal falยญlaยญcies and biases that Iโve come across while studyยญing pubยญlic relaยญtions and linguistics:
Fallacy of Composition
Fallacy of Division
The Gamblerโs Fallacy
Tu Quoque (Who Are You To Talk?)
Strawman
Ad Hominem
Genetic Fallacy (Fallacy of Origin or Fallacy of Virtue)
Cook, J. & Lewandowsky, S. (2011). The debunkยญing handยญbook. St. Lucia, Australia: University of Queensland.
Dwyer, C.P. (2017). Critical thinkยญing: Conceptual perยญspectยญives and pracยญticยญal guidelines. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; with a foreยญword by former APA President, Dr Diane F. Halpern.
Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2014). An integยญrated critยญicยญal thinkยญing frameยญwork for the 21st cenยญtury. Thinking Skills & Creativity, 12, 43โโโ52.
Forer, B. R. (1949). The Fallacy of Personal Validation: A classroom Demonstration of Gullibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 44, 118โโโ121.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. Penguin: Great Britain.
Simon, H. A. (1957). Models of man. New York: Wiley.
Thaler, R. H. (1999). Mental accountยญing matยญters. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 183โโโ206.
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncerยญtainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 4157, 1124โโโ1131.
West, R. F., Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2008). Heuristics and biases as measยญures of critยญicยญal thinkยญing: Associations with cogยญnitยญive abilยญity and thinkยญing disยญposยญiยญtions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 4, 930โโโ941.
The Renaissance lasยญted from the 14th to the 17th cenยญtury and was a periยญod of sigยญniยญficยญant culยญturยญal, artistยญic, politยญicยญal, and sciยญentifยญic rebirth in Europe.
Inspired by the Renaissance mindยญset, I strive to develยญop my creยญatยญive intelยญliยญgence, physยญicยญal strengths, and menยญtal well-being.
Jerry Silfwer, alias Doctor Spin, is an awarded senior adviser specialising in public relations and digital strategy. Currently CEO at Spin Factory and KIX Communication Index. Before that, he worked at Whispr Group NYC, Springtime PR, and Spotlight PR. Based in Stockholm, Sweden.
The Cover Photo
The cover photo isn't related to public relations obviously; it's just a photo of mine. Think of it as a 'decorative diversion', a subtle reminder that it's good to have hobbies outside work.
The cover photo has
.
Subscribe to SpinCTRLโitโs 100% free!
Join 2,550+ fellow PR lovers and subscribe to Jerryโs free newsletter on communication and psychology.
What will you get?
> PR commentary on current events.
> Subscriber-only VIP content.
> My personal PR slides for .key and .ppt.
> Discounts on upcoming PR courses.
> Ebook on getting better PR ideas.
Subscribe to SpinCTRL today by clicking SUBSCRIBE and get your first free send-out instantly.
