For instance, a person who has never seen an automobile would not know how to drive it, because of no exposure to such a thing. A stupid person, on the other hand, might have seen automobiles, but would still not be able to drive one, because he imagines that in order to move it you have to speak to it and ask it to move! This implies that, while in the former case when the person is given an explaination as to how to make an automobile move, he may learn to drive it; the latter will never be able to drive until he gives up his stupid notion about how an automobile moves.
In Snubian's answer, Snubian suggests that on the whole, "aware" and "know" may be used interchangeably and I agree However, I want to highlight that we sometimes might choose "aware" over "know" if we are trying to keep ourselves blameless for our ignorance.
I wasn't aware it was his birthday today. I didn't know it was his birthday today. In the second one, I would say that we are sort of saying that we ourselves are at fault for not having known it was his birthday today. I suggest this because by its very existence as a verb, to not "know" something means that we ourselves can "do" something about it as we can become aware "through inquiry" "Know," Definition 1Google.
Meanwhile, in the first one, I would say that we are saying ever so slightly that someone is at fault for not having given us knowledge informed us that it was the birthday boy's birthday on this day " Aware ," Google.
This someone may be ourselves, but oftentimes, we are talking about someone else who should have been in charge of "making us" aware. Thus, while we may not always be to blame for not being aware, we ourselves are almost always to blame for not having known.
But again, I agree with Snubian that the two are interchangeable on the whole. This slight difference is only from the very nuanced viewpoint of encountering the two in various situations day-to-day.abrahmacariya: [a+brahmacariya].
that which is contrary to the pure life, which naturally would be interpreted as essentially consisting in the breakage of one of the precepts, especially by engaging in sexual intercourse: a·brahmacariya replaces kāmesu·micchā·cāra in the list of the bodily akusala·kamma·pathas when intended for bhikkhus (kāmesu·micchā·cāra at AN vs a.
Ignorance vs. knowledge is a very apparent theme in the Book “Fahrenheit ". It is show more content Faber has been doing this for a long time and he has the books to thank for how much he knows about life and how things work. The dispute between rationalism and empiricism concerns the extent to which we are dependent upon sense experience in our effort to gain knowledge.
Definition of Knowledge Management. Do you have any Knowledge Management Definitions to share with us? Click here for a ranked list of KM Definitions shared by others - . Knowledge is a familiarity, awareness, or understanding of someone or something, such as facts, information, descriptions, or skills, which is acquired through experience or education by perceiving, discovering, or learning..
Knowledge can refer to a theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. It can be implicit (as with practical skill or expertise) or explicit (as with the. Knowledge vs. Ignorance In fahrenheit struggle revolves around the tension between knowledge and ignorance. Firemen destroy knowledge of all forms, books in perticlar.
This doesn’t stop Montag though.