Research Question of the Week - What is Knowledge? And How do we know?

[Venom]

We all claim to know or understand something.

Most of the members on ABC, advocate having dextrose and maltodextrin post exercise.

Many others on this site claim to know that the bible is true, and everything in it.

But how do we know what we know?

How do we validate what we advocate to others?

For instance, recently, myself and the other moderators have had the displeasure of dealing with some bodybuilders, who to put it bluntly, are completely vein. These people claim that the only way you can know what works for bodybuilders, is to either have competed or be “huge” whatever that means. And they refuse to listen to any other piece of advice against all reason or logic.

What do you guys think of this mentality?

To sum up my question this week, how do you guys know whether something is true or not, or whether it is garbage advice? What makes advice sound, or not sound to you? And, what sources do you use to obtain your own knowledge.

I hope to write an article on this in the next issue of JHR. I think it is pivotal that we understand this topic.

Let me say, there is no right or wrong answer. There are many ways of "knowing' and acquiring knowledge. I am just interested in what methods you guys use. And hopefully, this will make people more cognizant when analyzing advices.

If you need any help, I highly advise studying this article, A Systematic Annihilation of Pseudo “Scientific” Arguments (http://abcbodybuilding.com/pseudo%20science.php)

[newbuilder]

Venom,
Thank you for posting this, I was just pondering this tonight.
After reading and being inspired by the Proverbs4:5 "Get wisdom, get understanding:", I became motivated and enlivened to update my knowledge and understanding in bodybuilding.

How about the saying that goes something like :
You really know you are knowedgeable in something when someone asks you a question and you can confidently answer "I don't know"

This has been the approach that I have been taking when delving into the Advanced Nutrition articles here on this website, and then doing what I can to utilize.

Something that all the article have in common are References. This implies to me that every article is not actually an original or new piece of knowledge, but a selective collaboration of the collected knowledge of many other people who have come before. Is the latest and greatest new information that we receive on bodybuilding really latest and greatest or even in fact new?

Another question to ask - what came first? Knowledge or understanding?
Is understanding gained through the collection of knowledge? Or is knowledge the fruit of understanding?

There are many questions to ask and I really don't know how to tell the validity and truth of any of the information that I receive on this website or anywhere else for that matter on bodybuilding.

[Njari]

[ QUOTE ]
We all claim to know or understand something.

Most of the members on ABC, advocate having dextrose and maltodextrin post exercise.

Many others on this site claim to know that the bible is true, and everything in it.

But how do we know what we know?

How do we validate what we advocate to others?

For instance, recently, myself and the other moderators have had the displeasure of dealing with some bodybuilders, who to put it bluntly, are completely vein. These people claim that the only way you can know what works for bodybuilders, is to either have competed or be “huge” whatever that means. And they refuse to listen to any other piece of advice against all reason or logic.

What do you guys think of this mentality?

To sum up my question this week, how do you guys know whether something is true or not, or whether it is garbage advice? What makes advice sound, or not sound to you? And, what sources do you use to obtain your own knowledge.

I hope to write an article on this in the next issue of JHR. I think it is pivotal that we understand this topic.

Let me say, there is no right or wrong answer. There are many ways of "knowing' and acquiring knowledge. I am just interested in what methods you guys use. And hopefully, this will make people more cognizant when analyzing advices.

If you need any help, I highly advise studying this article, A Systematic Annihilation of Pseudo “Scientific” Arguments (http://abcbodybuilding.com/pseudo%20science.php)

[/ QUOTE ]

How can we discern if something is true? Well we need to set up some definitions first--the issue here is physical truth (as opposed to moral truth, which is measured by a different standard--the character of God). The best definition of physical truth that I have heard is "that which conforms to reality."

So, if I want to know if something is true, we need to ask if the statement conforms to reality (which is objective, and not influenced by will, desire, or personal experience--there is only <u>one</u> reality). One way to stest if something conforms to reality is to test it via the scientific method. I prefer this method to examine postulates.

Example (inspired by Venom's article on "Pseudoscience"):
Statement: Arnie is huge and smoked weed, so lighting up does not hinder you from getting huge."

What I first do is translate this observation into a hypothesis: "Smoking weed does not completely abrogate muscle development."

Now test it: Have someone smoke weed (Arnold already did this). Did they develop muscle? YES!!!

Conclusion: the hypothesis is true!

Now, I form a new hypothesis: "Smoking weed does not hinder muscle development."(this is a subtle yet crucial modification of the first hypothesis).

Test it: This would require a well controlled (perhaps double blind: smoking real dope vs. smoking fake dope) study with enough participants for statistical significance.

Conclusions would be drawn on these data, leading to a new hypothesis.

The bottom line: one should treat anecdota evidence (Arnold did it, so...) as an observation from which to form a hypothesis, NOT data from which to draw a conclusion.

[AZIronMine]

I have two favorite quotes from Albert Einstein, who I view as one of the most brilliant scientific minds of our time:

"Imagination is more important than knowledge"

and perhaps more on topic...

"I want to know God's thoughts. The rest are just details."

[Venom]

AZIronMine,

Welcome to ABC!

Could you tell us what your thoughts are on those quotes? Thanks!

And great posts guys, I am going to coment more later. /forum/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[President Wilson]

[ QUOTE ]
The bottom line: one should treat anecdotal evidence (Arnold did it, so...) as an observation from which to form a hypothesis, NOT data from which to draw a conclusion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Beautifully written!

[AZIronMine]

[ QUOTE ]
AZIronMine,

Welcome to ABC!

Could you tell us what your thoughts are on those quotes? Thanks!

And great posts guys, I am going to coment more later. /forum/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
I do not pretend to be a philosopher, but I have followed Albert Einstein as a combination of curiousity and in admiration.

As to the quote regarding imagination, my interpretation is that knowledge is specific and discrete. It can be attributed to individual experience, validation of other's experience, and in some cases careful reasoning and assertion.

Yet, I thought that Einstein also recognized our purpose goes beyond that of knowledge. We have to also think somewhat beyond. Hence, imagination.

As to the last, I think it is almost self-explanatory. Einstein might or might not have been a religious man, but I believe that he recognized something/someone was beyond him and beyond the questions of physics and mathematics. Even the most abstract questions of: "What is the universe and how did we come to be ?" cannot currently be answered by other than theory. Its more about believing and feelng, and whether you follow the paradigm of God or the paradigm of science.

If we believe in God, then we can perhaps assume that what God thinks is what is ultimately important. In some manner, knowledge helps us to learn and become more comfortable with our surroundings and things that we have no control over (history, nature, space, ontology).

My apologies for rambling and again, I caveat that I do not claim in any manner to be a philosopher, theologist, scientist or intellectual. I'm just a believer.

[jth16]

First off I would like to comment that this is one of the many reasons why I love ABC. It isn't only focusing on improving your body, but it also makes you brainstorm and think abstractly.

[ QUOTE ]
To sum up my question this week, how do you guys know whether something is true or not, or whether it is garbage advice? What makes advice sound, or not sound to you? And, what sources do you use to obtain your own knowledge.


[/ QUOTE ]

In my highly uneducated opinion, to deteremine whether something is factual or not it must have some form of evidence backing the validity of the statement.

The credentials and history of the person, or database that I am acquiring the information from impact whether or not I accept the given information as true or not. If the person or database has little or no credentials, and or has a history of giving false information then I would immediately disreguard the information or do some research of my own if I thought the information could have any truth to it.

Also, personal experience allows me to determine whether or not information is factual or not. For example, I have gone to church all of my life. I know the information commandments, and I have known I need him in my life to achieve eternal salvation since I was very young, but until the summer going into 9th grade did I finally accept Jesus as my Lord and Saviour. I had known the information, I had seen other people around me with Him in their lives, but I had not yet had a personal experience with him. After I did, it lead me to fully believe in Jesus and the Bible in its entirety. I still continue to see factual, physcial, mental, and spiritual evidence that Jesus Christ is alive and working, which affirms even moreso my beliefs.

[ QUOTE ]
Most of the members on ABC, advocate having dextrose and maltodextrin post exercise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I use maltodextrin and dextrose post workout.
How do I know that this is the most optimal post workout nutrition? I have several forms of evidence backing my belief.

1. The article is backed by many sources by highly accredited scientist.

2. After I implemented maltodextrin and dextrose into my post workout shake, I noticed that I gained muscle faster, and I felt like I had more energy after my workouts.

3. I see testimonials from many of my ABC brothers.


I hope my insight can help in some way.

Jordan

[Njari]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The bottom line: one should treat anecdotal evidence (Arnold did it, so...) as an observation from which to form a hypothesis, NOT data from which to draw a conclusion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Beautifully written!

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks, I appreciate it!

The nature of truth is fascinating to me--as an aspiring scientist, my "job" is to discern truth, but even this is becoming increasingly opposed to the popular worldview as our culture becomes more postmodern ("What is true for you is not necessarily true for me.") The Christian community is starting to mount a response to this perverted logic--I know focus on the family is starting something called the "Truth Project," (here is the website) (http://www.thetruthproject.org/). Also, my Dad just finished writing a novel built around the dangers of postmodern thought (he is also finishing a book on why US-Isreali relations are critical to our nation's future). (I would talk more about the books, but I don't know if this would count as "advertising"--I don't want to abuse the forum.)

[newbuilder]

I am going to go there,
Because many here are believers in the way,
Question it, the Lord says our physical presence is going to take the shape he has defined, must we make rebuttle?
How do we know that the Lord encourages or even supports bodybuilding?

[Njari]

Newbuilder, I'm not sure what you mean here. [ QUOTE ]
Question it, the Lord says our physical presence is going to take the shape he has defined

[/ QUOTE ] Could you elaborate? If you are stating that God has defined (or caused) reality, then we are in no way disagreeing--I was emphasizing the idea that there is ONE reality that we all coexist within. It is studyable, and knowledge of it can even teach us about its Creator:

"The heavens declare the glory of God;
the skies procliam the work of his hands.
Day after day they pour forth speech;
night after night they display
knowledge.
There is no speech or language
where their voice is not heard.
Their voice goes out into all the earth,
their words to the ends of the world."
(Psalm 19:1-4a)

"For since the creation of the world God's vinvisible qualities--his eternal power and his divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
(Romans 1:20)

[ QUOTE ]
How do we know that the Lord encourages or even supports bodybuilding?


[/ QUOTE ]

I think there are many options in life that we are free to decide on, and either option is morally acceptable (such as choosing a college, a place to live, or a hobby). Moreover, I think that bodybuilding is beneficial not only because it keeps our bodies in peak health (when done properly), but it also teaches us valuable lessons about having control over our bodies:

The following passage Paul is responding to a few statements ("Everything is permissible for me," and "Food for the stomach and the stomach for food."} These ideas were being used as a justification for sexual immorality. I especially like the part about not being mastered by anything. I feel like when I control what I eat, I start to gain control in other areas of my life, and I make more efficient use of the resources that I have been given.

"'Everything is permissible for me'-but not everything is beneficial.'Everything is permissible for me'- but I will not be mastered by anything. 'Food for the stomach and the stomach for food'- but God will destroy them both...Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body." (1 Corinthians 6:12-13a and 19-20)

This passage is telling us to honor God with our bodies. That doesn't mean that He is more pleased by an 8% bodyfat physique than a 9% bodyfat physique, but in general, I think there are physical, psychological and even spiritual benefits to mastering control of your body. The rest is just hobby/sport. Bodybuilding, like any other activity, must be done with the mindset of bringing God glory:
"...whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God." (I Corinthians 10:31b)

[newbuilder]

[ QUOTE ]
Moreover, I think that bodybuilding is beneficial not only because it keeps our bodies in peak health (when done properly), but it also teaches us valuable lessons about having control over our bodies:

The following passage Paul is responding to a few statements ("Everything is permissible for me," and "Food for the stomach and the stomach for food."} These ideas were being used as a justification for sexual immorality. I especially like the part about not being mastered by anything. I feel like when I control what I eat, I start to gain control in other areas of my life, and I make more efficient use of the resources that I have been given.


[/ QUOTE ]

OK, So you are saying that whatever practice we take up, as long as it is having control over our bodies then it is...What?
Can someone who practices sourcery taking control over their bodies?
Someone who practices Tantra, are they practicing control over their bodies? How does bodybuilding differ?
Is their a search for real knowledge or truth in bodybuilding?
There must be a reality that is common for all-I mean we all require food that is common amongst us all. We need to eat to survive and not only that, we need to drink too. That is reality. Is that also knowledge? Is it then true that we need food and drink to survive?

Let's look at it like this:
Reality is that we become hungry and thirsty.
Knowledge is the ability to recognize the possible remedies and causes for our hunger and thirst.
The Truth is that we need food and drink.

Our knowledge will bring us to the conclusion that a juicy steak and a few tall glasses of water will become a top choice and will remedy our hunger and our thirst.
And after we eat a steak and drink 3 or 4 glasses of water, we are no longer hungry or thirsty...... for about 2hours or so, and then the process starts all over again.
And that process will continue over and over again as long as our knowledge of that steak and water that we need does not run out.

But then we come to a time when we find that the reality is till that we are hungry.
And our knowledge brings us to know that we need a big juicy steak and water to drink, but the cows have all died, and the rivers have run dry. This knowledge has failed us and we will die if we continue to depend on it. For we find by this circumstance that what we had was not really knowledge, for true knowledge would never fail to find a solution to our given problem of hunger and thirst.

Hmmmmmmmmmm........
The reality is we are hungry and thirsty

Knowledge is to recognize the possible remedies and cause for our hunger and thirst - but all the food as died and the water has run dry. Real knowledge would tell us that there is a remedy and a cause that will never fail us, no matter what the circumstance. It will lead us to a food that will work 100percent of the time given even heaven and earth pass away.

"For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed."JOHN6:55. Knowledge.

Truth is we still need food and drink.

"I am that bread of life."JOHN6:48
"This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live forever."JOHN6:58. Truth.

So, here we have my answer. Real knowledge will never fail.
For even within my own body there are things going on that are too great and wonderful for me to know.
And Truth lasts forever.

[Adam Knowlden]

Great post Venom.

I believe to answer this question, we have to first address what intelligence is because intelligence is what guides our decision making processes.

This concept is so deep, I am planning on writing a JHR article about it!

I have been studying Stephen Covey's methods for making effective business decisions. Mr. Covey is a world renowned business consultant.

He breaks down intelligence (he did not come up with this concept, its been studied in the business world for quite some time now), into four catagories.

1. Mental Intelligence (IQ)
2. Physical Intelligence (PQ)
3. Emotional Intelligence (EQ)
4. Spiritual Intelligence (SQ)

I could go on for days about these 4. Note that because these dimensions of life overlap, you can not work exclusively on any one without touching directly or indirectly on the others!

In other words, it verifies that decisions need to be made on moral authority.

Buiness leaders are now recognizing that to survive in the current "knowledge worker era", old post industrial techniques of micromanagement are insufficient.

Mangers must empower their employees and allow all four intelligence to flurish.

Never the less, many businesses are trying to apply industrial age leadership strategies in a knowledge worker age. Business consultants predict these organizations will be swept away as this era unfolds. Similar to the ages of the past for instance the hunter/gatherer age, the agricultural age and soon the industrial age.

However these 4 intelligences are coorelated directly to quite a few "birth-gifts", including "THe freedome to chose", in which between a stimulus and response there is always a choice, no matter if the space between the stimulus and response is a fraction of a space, there is always a choice! Without understanding this concept we can not recognize our full potential for knowledge.

There is also another birth gift, the concept of natural laws or principals. Some include fairness, kindness, respect, honesty, integrity, service, and contribution. For example you can never have enduring trust without trustworthiness. CS Lewis argues this point repeatedly and basically created the case, and in doing so is shaping the way upper management leads businesses of the 21st century.

Seriously, I could go on for hours, its uncanny how much the biblical methods for operating a business line up with current business theory and the teachings of the greatest business coaches of the 21st century!

[rickck48]

Well my 2 cents worth, thanks Venom good question. My knowledge comes mostly for real time experience, and the actual experience of others, such as yourself, when you say you actually tried it. Sometimes it is scientific statements when it comes to the body. Some of the reasons I claim the bible as true and 100% true is form personal experiences that doctors can not explain medically and the things in my heart that tells me when i am convicted of what I just done. I do hope you have great succes with this question look forward to reading your results. /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif <font color="blue"> </font> The Best is yet to come!

[tarheelsykes]

great post.

I think it is too easy for people to take into account their own experience versus the overall consensus. An example is someone saying " I dont see why God would have a problem with a homosexual couple if they are happy and in love", is taking what they feel over the authority of the Bible.
What I have used ever since Grad school, is if someone suggests a theory, to find any research that pertains to it. while looking at that research, look at methodology, assumptions of researcher, etc, make sure the study is not only done properly, but that it is relevant.
The one thing that can be dangerous, is when people take the present research and assume that is completely definite. For example, going with Venom's example of most people on this site agreeing that whey,malto and dextrose are main ingredients for a PWO shake is based on the evidence to this point. However, if new studies that were pertinent came out that suggested otherwise, but people were not willing to change, then that is very dangerous, limiting their knowledge.
The last thing I know I have to be careful with, is not discrediting something just because it doesn't have scientific research to back it up. When I was in NC, there was a gym owner who had been an IFBB pro, he did the diet and exercise design for a lot of local bodybuilders. some of the things he did were very unconventional, but they always worked. those who followed what he said, were always excellent shape once they stepped on that stage (and I am talking about natural bb's, my sister was one of them).
So when it comes to knowledge, to me it is a mix of having an open mind, but being sure to research on your own at the same time. if something is stated, and you are not sure if it is correct, research, ask questions, etc yourself until can decide what is right and wrong. If your reason for believing something is because "so and so said that...", that is never a strong argument

[TasteLikeChicken]

I think that we must remain vigilant because what we assume is knowledge, more often then not creates dogmas. Theories that may have not been proven are sometimes assumed true if not contested for awhile. What we consider knowledge is based on reality and if it conforms with it. During the Age of Enlightenment humans began to rethink what was realy true and necessary, we need to constantly be doing the same. Reality is based alot on how we perceive it and is not necessarily always the same. Society creates it's norms and they change. Is reality logic and scientific? If God created everything, He had no obligation to make it make sense.