Knowledge is Overrated - Notes

These are the notes I wrote for the Mysterious Studies podcast episode Boundaries are Useful. I am uploading them here for those who find it easier to take in information by reading, or who is interested to see the notes that the episode is based on.

In this episode I want to talk about knowledge, and what can be said about knowledge, overall?

Quite an ambitious undertaking, I know. And I also know I might be way too young to really express myself in the matter. But based on these few years of experience, I also know that I dont seem to grow wiser over the years, I only learn about more and more things that I have absolutely no clue about. If it continues like this, I expect that I will be totally clueless in my later years.

So, best to express myself now. When I can still hold onto some kind of illusion that I know at least something, that it is possible to know something about, and may have something to share in this moment.

My knowledge is, obviously, affected by the world I grew into, and it's ideologies. The type of knowledge that was available and acceptable went hand in hand with what kind of thinking was encouraged.

From all my years of existing in a framework built on scientific materialism, and a Christian religion in the background, the word occult sounds dirty and wrong somehow. Forbidden. And the word Esoteric seems synonymous with ridiculous.

But as I started looking there, I found deep meaning in occult and esoteric works. And I think maybe just the act of letting myself look, in areas of "hidden" or "forbidden" knowledge helped me to start to challenge the rigid views and crumbling foundations that knowledge seemed to be built on in my time, or in my culture. World views that actually served to harm my own sense of identity whether as a woman or just a living being with a soul...but that is for another episode.

In this episode, I want to talk about knowledge, and attempt to meet the idea of how it exists in so many different forms.

Even though it was important for me to break through to allowing myself to access this hidden knowledge, I believe that even these areas of knowledge can become their own type of filter bubbles. And I want to encourage a view where we acknowledge the connections that exist between areas that seem far removed on the surface.

For simplicity's sake, I'm gonna try a metaphor. Knowledge, in a world where it is so widely accessible as in mine, can feel like an all-you-can-eat-buffet. You have all the different dishes of the different disciplines or genres or perspectives, and there are foods you have never seen before. And maybe some foods that are hidden from your view.

All of this gets overwhelming very fast, so I think many of us will settle for focusing on the foods that we already know that we like, and enjoy. This can be compared to staying in your comfort zone, or within our own bubble,, or focusing your attention on a few selected areas or hobbies. And then maybe sometimes you take a taste of something new. Maybe you like it and will start eating that too. Or it tastes horrible and you never touch it again. Or you start telling others how horrible that is.

Another way of treating this all-you-can-eat-buffet is to focus on those foods that make you feel so confused that you have no idea what to do with them. But for some reason they draw you in and you have to explore them until you can say: "ok, I think I get it, at least a little. I'm sated now." this approach was what got me looking into such areas as quantum mechanics, astrology, and learning how to navigate a sailing boat, mostly in theory. I have a side in me that is drawn to things that don't seem to make sense and I have to learn until at least something is starting to make sense.

Naiv.Super by Erlend Loe: being fed up by the amounts of knowledge and taking an "ignorant", naive approach

Now, I want to point out that neither of these different approaches is more right or wrong and that I also have my favorite foods in the buffet that I get back to time and time again.

But at the very least, it can be interesting to observe how you tend to function when it comes to knowledge, what foods seem to sustain you the most, and why.

One thing that I have had to accept is that I may have one ideal of how I would like to eat at this buffet, but that the way I actually eat is different. I am simply not interested in some foods, or areas of knowledge. I don't know why exactly, there's just no pull. But I think this is fine. Maybe this goes contrary to popular beliefs that more knowledge, and more data is always better. But I don't believe more is better. Maybe human minds are not meant to eat everything. I mean, know or learn everything. Maybe different minds need different foods. And maybe some limitations are necessary.

So, we already have a metaphor that connects to the body, to sustaining or nurturing oneself by taking in knowledge. But let's extend the metaphor so that the type of knowledge we talk about also includes other types of knowledge than only thinking or reading.

In our cerebral, mind-focused world, it seems that there are vast areas of knowledge that go completely unnoticed, forgotten or overlooked. Such is the knowledge of the body. Or the hands.

I have been a kind of person who kept reading and reading and very drawn to taking information trough my head, but did not give my body enough time to integrate it. To process it. And into this approach, I suddenly happened upon some occult, esoteric works, that surprised me, by asking me to feel into my own body. What? Can't I just sit here and read? Now I have to connect to my body?

I want you to stop for a moment and pay attention to your body, as you are listening to this and, perhaps, taking in what I say.

How does it feel in your body to listen?

That feeling, however and wherever you feel it, is also knowledge.

A while back, I read the book Sand Talk, and gained access to a vastly different view on knowledge creation than what I grew up with. I am not able to describe all dimensions of that fascinating book, so I will share a few pieces that stood out to me, and that I see connecting to this discussion. There, the process of thinking, or working through knowledge, was always accompanied by some kind of a physical act, like crafting a concrete object with your hands. There was an understanding how these actions are not at odds with each other, but complement each other and are even needed to process the thoughts at a deeper level.

Building upon this idea, but taking it in another direction, I can see a connection to ideas about silent knowledge, or practical knowledge, the knowledge in our hands. I believe I read about these in a book by Donald Schön. And due to my background as a lecturer in university, I also have learned some basics about pedagogy, and about the transmittal of knowledge and how different people learn the best.

Most of these pedagogical theories were built on some kind of a constructivistic foundation, meaning, that the focus is on analysing how knowledge is constructed. And these theories seem to often stay in the mind, the brain, because that was the view of knowledge in the culture where the theories were written. As something mostly existing in the mind.

So of course they all have their limits, of being thought up in a culture that places strict limits on what is seen as knowledge. And what is seen as construction. Construction of knowledge.

In the end, what can we actually know? I don't know.

But I know that I don't need to know everything, I'm not supposed to. Can Sound provocative if you come from a world where it is often said that you have to be so aware and so informed about everything. But what is that "everything" really?

I stopped reading daily news, as I noticed the only thing that did for me was to shift my attention for the day at being stressed by things that I could not do anything to change anyway. And sadly, the daily news is often far away from any kind of a nuanced, deeper view of things. I'm a curious person, so I still read longer reportages once a month or so, and the stories of a few writers or storytellers whose perspective I choose to take part on because it gives something to me.

And this, seems to work for me. I also believe the knowledge acquiring comes and goes in stages, some periods of time I just can't take in a lot, particularly if I'm in a state of trying to get my own stories out, like now, I might spend much less time soaking in perspectives as my main quest for this time period is to get my own perspective out. Right now I need it.

I'll end this episode with an assignment, so I don't (only) do the same one-way lecturing that I have criticized (though, it also has it's place! And mostly, anyway, this project IS me sharing my findings and that's fine...) but anyway, here's a little assignment for those who would want it.

Take a moment to consider, what do you know? In this moment? Just the first thing that comes up. Or, write a long list! A crazy mindmap! Then, consider, how do I know this? Where did I learn these things?

How does this knowledge feel?

What do I want to do with it?

Share it? Let it go? Learn something more?

And then, go do that.

A list of the books mentioned in the episode:

Naiv. Super by Erlend Loe
(A book questioning the need to be knowledgeable.)

Sand Talk by Tyson Yunkaporta
(A very fascinating book about indigenous knowledge, and much more.)

The Reflective Practitioner by Donald Schön
(A book about practical knowledge and reflecting in action)

A List of a few of my favorite quantum physics books:

The Tao of Physics by Fritjof Capra

The Quantum Universe: Everything that Can Happen Does Happen by Brian Cox and Jeffrey R. Forshaw

Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning by Karen Barad