Knowledge implementation is enough

The answer is NO. Knowledge is first of all ethics emotions politics and culture. These parameters establish the conditions to create knowledge for humanity. Human is not a computer::::: Human is political and social entity.

Sachin Ww : Thank you for your answer. Knowledge can be implemented in personal, regional, communal or human interests. Humanity needs integration, and organizations like UN should be strengthened to determine aims for sustainable growth of humanity and preservation of the environment. Political and economical power centers are run in personal interests of some groups of people or family. Human society is unable for fresh competitions and obstruct corruptions. Hence goal of implementation of knowledge for humanity fulfills partially. Our knowledge has created environmental pollution which can only be countered by strong institutions and healthy practices within it.

That is my opinion.

Dear Ranjan, "Human behavior flows from three main sources: desire, emotion, and knowledge." Plato The main problem as you stated is the "human pollution" in all domains mainly in Sciences.

Obviously not. But knowledge is the fundamental base of all surviving tools. Only knowledge can show the differences between good and bad or other alternatives.

To feel your health ( Preventive Care ) - Knowledge is essential to control your

domain of life ie Life & Death .

Niladri Das : Agree with you that knowledge is essential for differentiating good or bad. A knowledgeable has sense to differentiate between the two. However we see that knowledgeable is not leaders of the world civilization, The civilization is in hands of political leaders, corporate and bureaucrats principally. Knowledge of knowledgeable is utilized by the leaders that often have ambitions for dazzling life and less knowledge about depletion of life system on the Earth due to productions of artificial materials without proper management of its re-cycling.

Do you consider that knowledge is ruling the world?

I think S&T and knowledgeable are only tools of political leaders and corporate.

Please reply my humble points.

I understood your position. Before entering any comments we have to fixed our domain of discourse. Then this discussion should be relevant in every domain. when we are talking about leaders , in this case 'the leader' or any ' profounder' can lead the whole mass just because of balancing understanding between practical fact and what he inherently is trying to do on this mass or people. His or Her or Other cognition is not bounded by any theory or any norms. He maintains his population or crowd just on the immediate taste of people. He just gives the spark.

But for academician , they are dealing each and everything conceptually , not like a any leader. He is bound to make a system to maintain this academical flow. But unfortunately, maximum percentage of crowd do not want focus on this making theory or any kind of academical system. According to them , 'there is entertainment like others'. After any kind of non-academical work, they did not find that taste of divinity and love which is actually we are looking for.

Actually, the crowd do follow immediate pleasure and spark. Finally, that spark always comes from the immediate pleasure , not from any academical tool. Without hard work and patience nobody would not get any ENTERTAINMENT in Academics. So, we have to learn 'how to wait' and 'why wait' . Academics teach us this thing as well.

Looked at economically, societies that can innovate and sell their innovations to others will be more prosperous than those that do not. Most innovations in current times fall under the heading of science and technology. Other things being equal, a society that innovates in science and technology will prosper compared to others. A society would do well therefore to promote science and technology.

However, many societies have a love-hate relationship with science and technology. Being a "technocrat" is not a term of endearment. My own view is that there are two types of knowledge: devising practical recipes that work without knowing why ("know-how") and theory-based explanation of how things work ("science"). While it is true that scientific theories are not unique and grow and develop, know-how has the limitation that it is a blind search in the space of possibilities. There is nothing wrong with know-how, and a society can survive on know-how alone, but to illuminate the space of possibilities, theories are needed. I would say that the acceptance of science into the core values of a society, allowing people to create new scientific theories and critique and improve existing theories, is vital for scientific and technological innovation in that society. (An important caveat to this statement is that the bar is set high for scientific theories; a new theory must explain known experimental results and successfully predict new experimental results.)

Dear Niladri Das : I agree with you that

"Actually, the crowd do follow immediate pleasure and spark. Finally, that spark always comes from the immediate pleasure , not from any academical tool. Without hard work and patience nobody would not get any ENTERTAINMENT in Academics."

(End of quotation)

S&T has presented to live better by inventions. But our progress may come to an end due to rapid growth of artificial materials which are not re-cycled in the nature and ecosystem is being polluted at very fast rate.

I think that manufacturing technologies be based on re-cycling of each materials produced directly or indirectly after use of an article. Society should move to preserve the beauty of life on the earth and attaining social thinking at the place of personal thinking.

Social sciences can support to this. Our know-how should be more illustrative that include environmental impact of any manufacturing technology.

Thanks for your contribution.

Andrew Powell : It is true that S&T is driver of the civilization, however societal institutions and practices are van which bring the people towards prosperity. Thank you for your contributions.

Prabhat Ranjan Sir,

I like your this statement " Society should move to preserve the beauty of life on the earth and attaining social thinking at the place of personal thinking. "

This notion will be accepted when someone can realise the value of life or value of his existence. In this manner , we need a discipline life otherwise people cannot evaluate between the importance of 'spark' and what actually academical pleasure is.

It stricly depends on the cultural definition and intent of the knowledge producer

OF COURSE NOT.

above the salt , it means:

— Of or in a position of high standing, rank, regard, or repute. The term is derived from the social hierarchy of nobility in medieval times, in which salt, a precious commodity then, was set in the middle of the dining table. Those of high noble rank were seated "above the salt," that is, closer to the lord and lady of the house, while those in lower social standing were seated "below" it.

So, Knowledge is not the whole thing, I guess.

Using the following conversion sequence can make sense:

Data---Information---Knowledge---Wisdom.

Data and information are technical categories; knowledge and wisdom are human categories.

Knowledge is not enough for human existence, the conversion to time-tested wisdom is required, which works by double-loop (deutero) learning.

Science and life should be connected by creative and living spirit.

http://www.stephen.ternyik.scienceoflife.nl/

Knowledge can work as some basis for actual action.

We need fruitful action in these important aspects.

Discussion-- analysis-- resolution ----...... What is the ultimate effect of these if action is not taken?

To wrapped hands to this, I think Knowledge is unarguably the first step to willfully change behavior in anything we execute, in the case of education or workplace...but for it absence may render your deeds and effort wayward and does retard one's development.

True knowledge is enough for human existence, but false or uncertain knowledge do not help to human existence.

Knowledge is power & has no limit. We all have entered our life even for our final journey. We have with us our destiny which we bring along with our previous lives.

In this line, all the individual may bring with them the knowledge for their passing phase. This serves the controllable the source of knowledge which may be applicable for every individual.

This is my personal opinion

Emeka Nwadiora : I think that all is not in hands of knowledge producers. Plastic has been proved worst material for the environment, but it is in use due to scientists, engineers, producing companies, bureaucrats, political leaders and public also. Knowledge has been misused in this case. We should have wills to combat pollution, and utilize our knowledge to preserve the environment.

Stephen I. Ternyik : Thank you for your conclusions

" Knowledge is not enough for human existence, the conversion to time-tested wisdom is required, which works by double-loop (deutero) learning.

Science and life should be connected by creative and living spirit."

end of quotation

and link you have shared.

Knowledge is not and never will be enough for human existence. Because, every new discovery, every new invention implicitly involves a series of new problems and new horizons (goals) to explore. After about a century after the invention of plastic and after a massive use: both for objects and very useful and sometimes vital for humanity and for objects and rather trivial activities, we have recently realized that it is necessary and urgent to solve the problem of disposal of plastic wastes otherwise the environment and man will suffer irreparable and possibly fatal damages. Therefore, new studies and research are needed and urgent that will lead to the acquisition of new knowledge which in turn will pose new problems and new goals to be pursued.

Is Knowledge enough for human existence ? No, under the existing circumstances. In addition, prudent actions should take place, especially, by those who have the power in their hands. Things are not easy and words are not enough.

Knowledge is not limited to S & T.

Also, it requires practical applications so that it benefits everyone.

Aristidis Matsoukis , Leonardo Cannizzaro : Thank you for your response and considering problem of plastic and pollution as threat to the humanity. It confirms that human needs ethics and strong social structure for its prolonged existence on the Earth.

Ali Akhaddar , Sadanand Pandey

My apprehensions are if humanity states itself champion of knowledge; and can it survive with its present format of thinking where rift between poor and rich is widening and environment pollution in increasing day by day.

Thank you for bringing the concept of such wider knowledge, which is also theme of Stephen I. Ternyik .

Knowledge is not enought: Context is needed where this knowledge can be applied to produce innovation (product & service, value for people&humanity).

The transition process must be agile and productive so as to help new knowledge diffusion to reach novel targets, markets. I found a recent article providing a case. Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

The knowledge is very important

And it is power , but it is not enogh to achivement

Bulcsu Szekely : Thank you for your contribution and the research paper attached. I agree with you that context is essential for knowledge application. The paper relates the knowledge generation, storage, diffusion and application with firm innovation.

Knowledge management enhancing organization capabilities. Humanity as a whole at present is also more capable to make changes in the biosphere. But my question differs which try to seek

(1) if the direction of our capability generated works are proper

(2) are our works can sustain for long

Smaller organisms have less knowledge system within their community, however they have more capability to survive on the earth. For example, cockroaches are not intelligent than us, but they survive - not worse than the human.

Human knowledge is creating environmental pollution, which can end its game.

Society is governed by selfishness of people on top. It is not governed as per needs of the society.

Humanity has to set a framework at United Nations level. The solutions discussed should be compulsory for all the nations. All the nations should have a system which control the markets and government machinery in accordance to the needs of environment preservation.

The political leaders should be knowledgeable than bureaucrats. Since they are the most responsible persons and have largest power.

We (public) have to limit/control our greed.

That is my opinion.

Ana Fructuoso

Shatha Yousif

Hassan Izzeddin Sarsak

Sadanand Pandey

It is generalized from the discussion that knowledge only is not enough for human existence, however it plays several roles in the society.

Knowledge avails several information for sustainable growth of the society. However human instincts seems to be not supporting the human to utilize this knowledge for the people as a community. Human instincts directs it to live for individual life and for short span of time.

Development of instincts within an individual and an awakened society for common concerns of individuals - could not be achieved yet.

It is a time to do for all the society - all the environment and biosphere.

The knowledge is a power, it is not enough to get achivement

Perhaps my answer will be paradoxical. But I believe that knowledge does not increase security, but reduces it. The danger to humanity's existence comes from its knowledge. Knowledge itself is and still is a threat to the existence of humanity. Humanity in the middle ages could not destroy itself, and now can. And this is thanks to knowledge and technology based on them. Moreover, I think humanity has destroyed itself more than once in the past. There were only the savages and we their descendants. Knowledge has such a feature that when they accumulate more than a certain amount, they destroy their carriers. Those who do not have this knowledge remain. They continue the human race. I will add that if the person was more reasonable and less aggressive, then perhaps it would not be so and I would be wrong. But unfortunately, he is blunt and aggressive, so that the knowledge only increase human capabilities in no WAY increasing its morality, i.e., increase the danger. Roughly as if would monkey instead stick gave machine gun Kalashnikov (AK-47).

Возможно мой ответ будет парадоксальным. Но я считаю, что знания не повышают безопасность, а понижают. Опасность для существования человечества исходит от его знаний. Знания сами по себе представляют и еще и создают угрозу существования человечества. Человечество в средние века не могло уничтожить само себя, а теперь может. И это благодаря знаниям и основанным на них технологиям. Более того, я думаю, человечество уже не раз уничтожало себя в прошлом. Оставались только дикари и мы их потомки. Знания имеют такую особенность, что когда они накапливаются больше определенной величины, то уничтожают своих носителей. Остаются, кто не имеет этих знаний. Они и продолжают человеческий род. Добавлю еще, что если бы человек был более разумным и менее агрессивным, то возможно это было бы не так и я был бы не прав. Но к сожалению он туп и агрессивен, так что знание только увеличивают возможности человека НИКАК не повышая его нравственности, т.е. увеличивают опасность. Примерно как если бы обезьяне вместо палки дали автомат Калашникова (АК-47).

Eugene Veniaminovich Lutsenko : I support your views and worry in your words:

".... But I believe that knowledge does not increase security, but reduces it.... Knowledge has such a feature that when they accumulate more than a certain amount, they destroy their carriers. Those who do not have this knowledge remain. .... But unfortunately, he is blunt and aggressive, so that the knowledge only increase human capabilities in no WAY increasing its morality. "

(end of quotation)

Human has remained enough aggressive to destroy the life and cultures of others. However, it prolonged due to its intelligence and community thinking, up to the point when it was using natural items and materials. But after invention of artificial materials, pollution has increased and the world leaders and scientists are not able to obstruct/minimize it.

The present society ignores morality towards the nature and estimates S&T as solution to all problems. But I think S&T is giving irreparable loss and problems. Consider: We are constructing roads on the Himalayas, the soil of the mountain erases and reaches in the river Ganges. The Himalaya and the Ganges - both are now in problems, which were (and are) the life of that region.

Morality is essential to use S&T.

It must be admitted that a man armed with knowledge is more dangerous than a man without knowledge. Knowledge does not improve the person, but makes it more powerful. And he does not use his power for good. There is a thought that maybe it would be better if a person did not have knowledge and power based on them. It is necessary to give knowledge only to those people who are able to use it correctly and for the good. But these are definitely not politicians. Scientists cannot control the application of the knowledge they have created. The question arises, so maybe it's better not to create them? For example, what good did nuclear weapons bring to mankind? This problem is called "Science and morality".

Надо признать, что человек вооруженный знанием опаснее человека без знаний. Знания не улучшают самого человека, но делают его мощнее. И он применяет свою мощь не во благо. Возникает мысль, что может быть было бы лучше, если бы человек не обладал знаниями и основанной на них мощью. Надо давать знания только тем людям, которые в состоянии правильно и во благо ими воспользоваться. Но это точно не политики. Ученые не в силах контролировать применение созданных ими знаний. Возникает вопрос, так может быть лучше их не создавать? Например что хорошего человечеству принесло ядерное оружие? Эта проблема называется "Наука и нравственность".

Eugene Veniaminovich Lutsenko : Yes it is true and is a fact that a man with knowledge may be more dangerous. Knowledge makes people powerful at the place of enhancing morality in it. The present day world of consumerism had snatched humanity from the people. In India, in previous times some knowledge were transfer to those people only who can use it for all e.g. knowledge of medicines etc.

We are losing morality. Consumerism has widened the gap between people.

Prabhat Ranjan!

India is not just a country. It is a fragment of a powerful ancient civilization. This civilization died as a result of incorrect application of knowledge. Truth not its representatives, and its enemies. Enemies were destroyed. But the supercivilization of India did not recover from the terrible war and fell into decline. Now she more resembles not on the burning a fire knowledge, and on together coals, on which the here the here run sparks.

Индия - это не просто страна. Это осколок мощной древнейшей цивилизации. Эта цивилизация погибла именно в результате некорректного применения знаний. Правда не ее представителями, а ее врагами. Враги были уничтожены. Но и сверхцивилизация Индии не оправилась после ужасной войны и пришла в упадок. Сейчас она больше похожа не на горящий костер знания, а на кучу углей, по которым то там то здесь пробегают искорки.

knowledge is certainly a base for the existence of life.

For e.g. take the caveman during stone age how he developed the stone tools for fire and his other usage.

Present humanity is solely based on the application of S&T. This is very true. Simple e.g. can anybody tell a person without cell/mobile/smartphone phone these days.

Care regarding the development of S&T is taken by the political and social framework. Though the framework is strong selfish nature of individuals in a community is creating problems.

Yes, invertebrates and primitive organisms though successful, our hi-fi technology is killing them and effecting their populations (usage of fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, GMOs).

Perhaps, dependence on medication and medical facilities reducing stamina of human (though so-called life expectancy increased).

Humanity already destroyed the environment (bitter truth/we need to accept).

The UN says the environment is a deadly, worsening mess.

But it also says it's not too late to fix the planet

(https://twitter.com/QuickTake/status/1105904499770691585?fbclid=IwAR35zNrOxVJK00x506ITiFKM-9a1sIZQyS4rMerldkAeI4vNLIMWg8oY_wA)

In my view, it may be difficult to strengthen S & T without the political or cultural or ethical framework.

Jetty Ramadevi : I am agree with your most of the comments. S&T is base of human development and humanity should be united irrespective to political or cultural frameworks.

No single man is isolated of each other and using technology. But when we are integrated to apply S&T, our political and other frameworks would be able to combat problems of pollution which is not easy.

Our society has complexed to be turned into global, but our instincts are oriented to selfishness.

Human quarrels (worry) for wealth. But for protecting the environment, all people waits that others should minimize it's use of plastics and other such materials.

We are disturbing the natural cycles and threads of life system is weakening day by day.

Humanity is responsible for large scale biodiversity loss.

So we have to start from ourselves to live simpler life and contribute for sustainable growth of humanity.

Prabhat, what I mean to say is that individual's commitment without the political or cultural frame work is difficult. If it sounds in a different way sorry, do I need to change the sentence!!!

Jetty Ramadevi : No, there is no need to change the sentence. I understood the meaning. Political and cultural frameworks are necessary for solution of today environmental problems.

It is disgusting that political leaders are elected by votes, but often they have no knowledge on environmental issues. Their general tendency is to mobilize the society for short term goals and sometimes they narrow the human temper on the bases of castes, creeds, regions and religions. They are commonly from high income group where it seems all is well. When you move to interior, you may see the results of exploitation of poor by high society, results of exploitation of natural resources.

Maintaining natural cycles and throw any garbage only after processing in the nature is much essential.

Our knowledge has tarnished the beauty of nature and weakened the life system on the Earth.

Exactly mentioned Prabhat.

I think Knowledge is the primary factor that clearly distinguishes the human race from the animals.

Human has the power to judge situations, decide between what is good and what is bad and make decisions voluntarily. It is important that we make the best use of the gift of knowledge so that we achieve great feats and heights in every domain of our life.

Djaafar Zemali : I agree with you that knowledge would be helpful to achieve new goals for human dominance. At the same time I would like to aware you that human race is among the living system and it has no existence without availability of other living beings. Human is able to make changes in the environment, but its potential of adaptability in the environment is being minimized. Like you, I wish for bright future of the humanity. But it is only possible when we are sensitive to our environment, when elites could think about common men in the society. Ethics is essential to make use of S&T.

Humanity poses new questions with increasing speed ...

Therefore, the relative amount of knowledge does not grow and may even decrease ...

Technological experiments are becoming increasingly large and dangerous...

Science is an evolving concept by itself, Man often tends to forget it ... but his irresistible curiosity reminds him of it.

Did you say " man"? And You know that 62% of the world population is female right?

Humanity has much more knowledge than it needs to exist. In addition to the knowledge necessary for existence, he still has knowledge sufficient to destroy all mankind

Knowledge is of no use if those who will rightfully apply it is inexistent...

1. Kaviratna Kaalidaas says: शरीरमाद्यं खलु धर्मसाधनम्

[śharīram ādyaṃ khalu dharma sādhanam = The body is the foremost to do [good] deeds, In; kumArasambhavam (5.33)]

fyi: It is also the motto of AIIMS, New Delhi: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/85/All_India_Institute_of_Medical_Sciences%2C_Delhi.svg

2. Also, C.S. Lewis quotes: "We don't have souls. We ARE souls. We have bodies."

Therefore, to produce/use the "body of knowledge" (or consciousness) we need a body!

Thanks and regards.

Ultimately, knowledge is everything.

Coffee can also increase stamina when you drink it before exercise, thanks to the effects of caffeine.

Kaukab Abid Azhar : I think that knowledge and application of knowledge - both is important. If knowledge is implemented wrongfully, it could be disastrous.

I believe knowledge is everything

Prabhat Ranjan That’s depend on that knowledge itself. The right knowledge in the right time, makes senses. The human could by more active with required knowledge.

Knowledge is one of the important things for the survival and continuity of humanity over the past years. Many species have become extinct despite their enormity and strength due to their lack of knowledge necessary to face environmental changes.

Human knowledge will enable it to survive for long periods or to reach eternity. In the distant future, mankind might be able to move the solar system to a safer place, out of the danger of asteroids hitting Earth.

Ali Abdulhassan Abbas : I think differently. Environmental pollution is a big problem. Environmental destruction has posed threats to many species on the Earth. A large number species of mammals and reptiles have been lost. Large number of bird species are also lost. Air, water and soil - all life supporting ingredients are being polluted. Reverse cost of pollution is not minimal. The humanity has to plan to minimize pollution for its prolonged existence.

Knowledge can help you in survival by guiding in using the resources..

But can't help you in survival per se.

Prabhat Ranjan

Knowkedge is power.

Yes , knowledge is every thing

Over-sentive teeth is problematic for society .

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_Knowledge-It_s_source_developement_measurement

S&T also include as sub-domains historical, political, social, economic, and ethic sciences. They are a part of the S&T progress. Having said that, knowledge should be sufficient enough to preserve the human existence through exploration and exploitation of new opportunities.

Knowledge is a necessary (but not sufficient) requirement. In addition to knowledge acquired from books and through universities one must have common sense, pragmatism and "street sense." There are a lot of people with excessive book knowledge but with limited skills as to how to apply in practical situations

Knowledge is great benefit, however you need ability and relevant environment as well to use your knowledge effectively .Sometimes I face situations when I know what to do, however I am not able to realize my knowledge for different reasons. It is very upsetting, however it is clear that knowledge is not sufficient to realize all your intentions, but it definitely help to survive.

Yas

knowledge is necessity

I don't think so...human existence needs more than one factor.

Knowledge is important, it makes us more capable, superior and develop in our lives.

Fazliddin Sodiqovich Jalilov , Khansaa Azeez Obayes Al-Husseini , Huda A Al-Sarraf , Mohammed Ali Bait Ali Sulaiman , Farooq Noraldeen , Mariam Chkhartishvili Srini Vasan , Len Leonid Mizrah , Jaydip Datta , Balqees Al-Musawi

No...

Need more things ...

Knowledge is though only one single potential power that can be gained via five fundamental sensory systems of human body. Every sensory system needs hundreds of thousands external sources to health and functional for better performance. Accordingly, the stronger/healthy these sensory organs, the cleaner will be the knowledge for fruitful output or for optimal decision.

If it's existence that you ask, yes; it is more than enough, in my opinion. However, maybe it is the quality of existence that matters. I think we would still survive with nothing but knowledge. It only becomes more baffling if you take into account the fact that knowledge is actually the motive and incentive that drives us towards practice.

Milad Shirvaliloo : It is true that human existence is based on knowledge and it has proved challenging to other mammals and reptiles. However existence of cockroaches and some other insects is even challenging to the humanity due to their immense reproductions and adapting abilities. Knowledge and intelligence of humans may also give rise to atomic wars after which insects may win the challenges. It may be negative thinking but is based on some possibilities.

Knowledge is supreme in human society, however the most powerful people on the Earth are politicians and corporate where some political leaders in the world much illiterate. Knowledge is an application up to yet i. e. not supreme in the society.

That is how I think.

Muhammad Ali : The mind is also with sensory organs for knowledge and feelings.

Depends on what is considered as the "objective" of human existence. When that is decided upon, then it would be pertinent to ask whether knowledge alone is sufficient to achieve it, or something else is needed.

I do not think so

No!

Isn't it why we exist

We are becoming

The classic phrase by Descartes 'I think therefore I am ' provides evidence that we are sentient, inquisitive, creative and so forth

Without knowledge we are less than....

I went on many dates and people said I was working my way through the trades....for me I am passionate about what is, what could be, where we could be...so having a huge commitiment to developing oneself I find attractive ...and thus, those who desire not, are missing out on what they could learn, and what they could be.

Sadanand Pandey

Afraa Ibrahim

Balqees Al-Musawi

Knowledge is base of human progress, but humanity also needs fraternity and democratic culture with worries on the environment. Previously knowledge was personal, but now it is global. Therefore people have to adapt global thinking at the place of personal thinking. That is my opinion.

Sadanand Pandey

Capacity, the function of knowledge, professional culture and the enabling environment, is far more important than only knowledge. Capacity is the ability to perform certain tasks successfully. But even capacity is not enough for human existence. Luck and coincidences can influence the course of events greatly.

I am unclear on issues no. We have to explain, explore, describe..even if we bring in spirituality we are illustrating more non-material insights.

We do not just exist..we are breathing, Hearts beating, and view people lives when they pass..

What is the no, what is it knowledge or human sensory behaviour not countenance

Beverly Dawn Metcalfe : Humanity is more valuable than only human presence (existence). Human S&T is product of uniting culture which should be promoted and more strong society is needed which could be able to preserve the rights of non-voiced also.

I think not

I agree orangey. Not sure what you mean by S and T...yes uniting culture is supported

I have been arguing for sentient...

No, not at all.

What is S and T

We have learned so much, but we still know very little.