Philosophy Now Forum

I thought the concept of What is a Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK] or Reality [FSR] is easily understood until someone ask me about it.
I raise this thread as reference to provide the answer just in case if anyone do not know what a FSK is.

What is a Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK] can be understood via the following;

What is a Framework [conceptual and intellectual]?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_framework
A conceptual framework is an analytical tool with several variations and contexts. It can be applied in different categories of work where an overall picture is needed. It is used to make conceptual distinctions and organize ideas. Strong conceptual frameworks capture something real and do this in a way that is easy to remember and apply.

The use of the term conceptual framework crosses both scale (large and small theories)[4][5] and contexts (social science,[6][7] marketing,[8] applied science,[9] art[10] etc.). Its explicit definition and application can therefore vary.

Conceptual frameworks are particularly useful as organizing devices in empirical research. One set of scholars has applied the notion of conceptual framework to deductive, empirical research at the micro- or individual study level.

What is a System?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System
A system is a group of interacting or interrelated entities that form a unified whole.[1] A system, surrounded and influenced by its environment, is described by its boundaries, structure and purpose and expressed in its functioning. Systems are the subjects of study of systems theory.

Framework and System of knowledge [FSK]
What is a Framework and System of knowledge [FSK] can be understood by combining the above two definitions [Framework & System] with Knowledge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge

A Framework and System of Knowledge is an imperative structure and mechanism as a ground in the establishment of what is Fact.

What is a Fact? [not as in Analytic Philosophy]
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=29486

A fact is a thing that is known to be consistent with objective reality and can be proven to be true with evidence.
For example, "This sentence contains words." is a linguistic fact, and
"The sun is a star." is a cosmological fact.
Further, "Abraham Lincoln was the 16th President of the United States." and "Abraham Lincoln was assassinated." are also both facts, of history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact#In_law

From the above it is noted, 'what is fact' must be qualified and conditioned to its specific FSK with its specific constitution [explicit or implied]. There are other FSKs, i.e. scientific [& its subs], legal, economics, medical & etc. of other fields of knowledge.

Since FSKs are constructed by humans, there is a degree of credibility to each specific FSK.
The most credible FSK with the highest veracity at present is the Scientific FSK as the standard bearer to compare other FSKs relatively.

Why the Scientific FSK is the most credible at present?
see: viewtopic.php?p=489333#p489333

The above is a description of what is a Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK] or Reality [FSR].

Here's ChatGPT's view:

ChatGPT wrote:Yes, the term "A Framework and System of Knowledge" is a meaningful and valid phrase to describe the structured organization and interrelatedness of knowledge in a particular field or discipline, such as science. It acknowledges that knowledge is not just a collection of isolated facts, but is rather an interconnected system of ideas and concepts that can be organized and studied within a framework or structure.

Using this phrase to describe scientific knowledge implies that there is a systematic process by which scientific facts are discovered, verified, and integrated into a broader understanding of the natural world. This can include concepts such as scientific method, peer review, and consensus-building within the scientific community.

Overall, while the specific phrase "A Framework and System of Knowledge" may not be commonly used, it accurately reflects the way that knowledge is organized and understood within many academic fields.

When asked of the FSK relevance to Morality:

Yes, the concept of a framework and system of knowledge can also be applied to the field of morality. In this case, the term would refer to the organized and structured understanding of moral principles and ethical theories within the discipline of ethics.

Within ethics, there are various frameworks and systems of knowledge that help to guide moral reasoning and decision-making. For example, consequentialist theories such as utilitarianism focus on the outcomes or consequences of actions, while deontological theories such as Kantian ethics prioritize following moral duties or rules regardless of their outcomes. Other ethical frameworks include virtue ethics, care ethics, and feminist ethics.

By understanding these different frameworks and systems of knowledge, individuals can more effectively navigate moral dilemmas and make informed ethical decisions. Overall, the concept of a framework and system of knowledge can be applied to many different fields, including both scientific and moral domains.

Discuss?? Alternative Views?

There was no need to start a new thread on this. And as I said in the other thread:

I'm asking for necessary and sufficient criteria for something to count as a "framework" versus whatever the alternatives would be. People formulate concepts, they have ideas, they analyze things, etc.--what makes some of those activities count as "framework" whereas sometimes it wouldn't be a "framework"?

What you're not getting is that I'm wanting you to give me a set of demarcation criteria. It could be fuzzy if it needs to be--it could be in the manner of property clusters, for example (so that, say, we give 10 criteria, and any arbitrary set of 6 or 7 of them would make something count as a "framework"), although I also want you to say which criteria are necessary and which would be sufficient, but give some demarcation criteria. And really, I want you to do this for an FSK/R, not just the terms in isolation from each other.

Despite my explanation of what is a Framework and System of Knowledge many times in here and the Ethical Theory section, I still get such ignorant complains;

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 11:03 am

such can be verified and justified via the scientific FSK.

Will you shut up about "FSK"! It's really getting on my nerves, and I wager I'm not the only one to feel incredibly irritated by it.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 11:03 am

This "ought-not-ness-to-kill-human" is first a scientific fact via the scientific FSK and subsequently an objective moral fact [relativistic] when processed via a moral FSK [the frameworks as mentioned above].

Also mentioned above; shut the fuck up about FSK.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 11:03 am

If you are indifferent and lackadaisical in improving moral progress via recognizing of the inherent objective moral facts [relativistic], then you are indirectly complicit to all the evil acts that will happen in the future.

I imagine you arrived at that conclusion via the idiot FSK.

I did a google search on the following specific terms in ".. ";

"Framework of knowledge" = 43.6 million hits
"System of knowledge" = 75 million hits

Using common linguistic sense, it should be easy to understand what is meant by
Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK].

Well, prima facie, there seem to be two kindsa FSKs, oui? Also, there already exists a term for FSKs.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:02 am Using common linguistic sense, it should be easy to understand what is meant by
Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK].

But you seem to depend on the term to make what is basically nonsense sound respectable, which necessitates its appearance in every other sentence you write.

Agent Smith wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:27 am Well, prima facie, there seem to be two kindsa FSKs, oui? Also, there already exists a term for FSKs.

?????
If you look up www.abbreviations.com
https://www.abbreviations.com/serp.php?st=FSK&p=2

There about 30 FSKs.
There are probably 100s of FSK elsewhere in different languages.

There is nothing wrong with my use of FSK provided as a protocol I explain what it represents.

If you search for the Abbreviation, ABC, there are about 300 of them.


Here is F S Ks ranked in popularity:
Frequency Shift Keying
Freiwillige SelbstKontrolle der filmwirtschaft
Freshman Survival Kit
Fort Scott, Kansas USA
Forsvaret Spesial Kommando
Fräizäit Sport Kéinzeg
Farming Systems Kenya
Freies Sender Kombinat
Full Sport Karate
Full Shift Keying
Frontier Schools of Karate
Frontier School of Karate
Frequency Standard Keying
Frequency Shifting Keying
Frequency Shift Keyed
Free Space Kinematics
Francis Scott Key
Foil Scrim Kraft
Fleet Street Kitchen
First Step to Korea
Federation of Shotokan Karate
Federalnaya Sluzhba Kontrazwedki
Frequency Shift Key
Flight Safety Kit
Frequency-Shift Keyed
Front Suspension Kit
Filter Service Kit
Federation du Sport Karting

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:02 am I did a google search on the following specific terms in ".. ";

"Framework of knowledge" = 43.6 million hits
"System of knowledge" = 75 million hits

Using common linguistic sense, it should be easy to understand what is meant by
Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK].

Actually what you just showed with the millions of hits is that those three very abstract terms can be interpreted in a very large number of ways. And your use of the term, given the diverse set of examples you have given for FSKs is not clear at all. It has all the earmarks of creating an authoritative phrase for your idiosyncratic epistemology.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 7:42 am

Agent Smith wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:27 am Well, prima facie, there seem to be two kindsa FSKs, oui? Also, there already exists a term for FSKs.

?????
If you look up www.abbreviations.com
https://www.abbreviations.com/serp.php?st=FSK&p=2

There about 30 FSKs.
There are probably 100s of FSK elsewhere in different languages.

There is nothing wrong with my use of FSK provided as a protocol I explain what it represents.

If you search for the Abbreviation, ABC, there are about 300 of them.


Here is F S Ks ranked in popularity:
Frequency Shift Keying
Freiwillige SelbstKontrolle der filmwirtschaft
Freshman Survival Kit
Fort Scott, Kansas USA
Forsvaret Spesial Kommando
Fräizäit Sport Kéinzeg
Farming Systems Kenya
Freies Sender Kombinat
Full Sport Karate
Full Shift Keying
Frontier Schools of Karate
Frontier School of Karate
Frequency Standard Keying
Frequency Shifting Keying
Frequency Shift Keyed
Free Space Kinematics
Francis Scott Key
Foil Scrim Kraft
Fleet Street Kitchen
First Step to Korea
Federation of Shotokan Karate
Federalnaya Sluzhba Kontrazwedki
Frequency Shift Key
Flight Safety Kit
Frequency-Shift Keyed
Front Suspension Kit
Filter Service Kit
Federation du Sport Karting

Did you try a thesaurus? How does one fit the universe inside one's head?

Even though not perfect, I believe ChatGPT will give a very basic understanding of 'what is a FSK' in terms of general knowledge since ChatGPT has access to the whole database of accessible knowledge in the internet.

Those who are FSK skeptics in this case are insulting their own intelligence.

Here's ChatGPT's view:

ChatGPT wrote:Yes, the term "A Framework and System of Knowledge" is a meaningful and valid phrase to describe the structured organization and interrelatedness of knowledge in a particular field or discipline, such as science. It acknowledges that knowledge is not just a collection of isolated facts, but is rather an interconnected system of ideas and concepts that can be organized and studied within a framework or structure.

Using this phrase to describe scientific knowledge implies that there is a systematic process by which scientific facts are discovered, verified, and integrated into a broader understanding of the natural world. This can include concepts such as scientific method, peer review, and consensus-building within the scientific community.

Overall, while the specific phrase "A Framework and System of Knowledge" may not be commonly used, it accurately reflects the way that knowledge is organized and understood within many academic fields.

When asked of the FSK relevance to Morality:

Yes, the concept of a framework and system of knowledge can also be applied to the field of morality. In this case, the term would refer to the organized and structured understanding of moral principles and ethical theories within the discipline of ethics.

Within ethics, there are various frameworks and systems of knowledge that help to guide moral reasoning and decision-making. For example, consequentialist theories such as utilitarianism focus on the outcomes or consequences of actions, while deontological theories such as Kantian ethics prioritize following moral duties or rules regardless of their outcomes. Other ethical frameworks include virtue ethics, care ethics, and feminist ethics.

By understanding these different frameworks and systems of knowledge, individuals can more effectively navigate moral dilemmas and make informed ethical decisions. Overall, the concept of a framework and system of knowledge can be applied to many different fields, including both scientific and moral domains.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 8:11 am When asked of the FSK relevance to Morality:

Yes, the concept of a framework and system of knowledge can also be applied to the field of morality. In this case, the term would refer to the organized and structured understanding of moral principles and ethical theories within the discipline of ethics.

Within ethics, there are various frameworks and systems of knowledge that help to guide moral reasoning and decision-making. For example, consequentialist theories such as utilitarianism focus on the outcomes or consequences of actions, while deontological theories such as Kantian ethics prioritize following moral duties or rules regardless of their outcomes. Other ethical frameworks include virtue ethics, care ethics, and feminist ethics.

By understanding these different frameworks and systems of knowledge, individuals can more effectively navigate moral dilemmas and make informed ethical decisions. Overall, the concept of a framework and system of knowledge can be applied to many different fields, including both scientific and moral domains.

I'm pretty sure this FSK concept isn't meant to be used in the way you are trying to use it. Without looking into it further, I get the impression you have misunderstood what it is.

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 8:20 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 8:11 am When asked of the FSK relevance to Morality:

Yes, the concept of a framework and system of knowledge can also be applied to the field of morality. In this case, the term would refer to the organized and structured understanding of moral principles and ethical theories within the discipline of ethics.

Within ethics, there are various frameworks and systems of knowledge that help to guide moral reasoning and decision-making. For example, consequentialist theories such as utilitarianism focus on the outcomes or consequences of actions, while deontological theories such as Kantian ethics prioritize following moral duties or rules regardless of their outcomes. Other ethical frameworks include virtue ethics, care ethics, and feminist ethics.

By understanding these different frameworks and systems of knowledge, individuals can more effectively navigate moral dilemmas and make informed ethical decisions. Overall, the concept of a framework and system of knowledge can be applied to many different fields, including both scientific and moral domains.

I'm pretty sure this FSK concept isn't meant to be used in the way you are trying to use it. Without looking into it further, I get the impression you have misunderstood what it is.

His formal notion of an FSK is more or less the same as a Domain of discourse although he extends it to some odd things such as Astrology and Miss Universe pageants that would normally not qualify.

Indeed, those domains of discourse are central to the theory that (among things written by real philosophers) I consider to most closely resemble his central theory which is fictionalism. The problem though is that he has presumably read about fictionalism at some point and borrowed aspects, but not actually understood how it works or why. You can tell this because I am a fictionalist - at least in regards to morality and maths - and there's no reason to suppose that the legend that is Pete to the H is not also in that camp... so that means VA can't really be there.

You simply cannot base moral realism on a foundation of such extreme skepticism as is required to announce that the Moon doesn't really exist. That's a foundation for moral skepticism or outright nihilism and nothing else. So if he is capable of learning, then one day VA will need to either heavily revise his FSK theory or else start using it for what it can do instead of what he is aiming for.

Given that his intentions are plainly to create rigid informational hierarchies over which he personally has total dictatorial authority, the whole FSK-derived-from-global-antirealism thing was never going to deliver. But nothing else ever would either, he's a window licking fucknut and will never be an authority no matter what weird shit he gets up to.

ChatGPT is just an engine for outputting cosmetically plausible looking text. It loops through a series of predictions of what word to place next in line until the prediction is that the best thing to do is stop. Only idiots paste CGPT output into philosophy forums for any reason other than to commemorate an interesting curio. It does not understand words at all and it is a source of concern that our resident PhD expert in computational neuroscience doesn't understand that ¬_¬

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:14 pm His formal notion of an FSK is more or less the same as a Domain of discourse although he extends it to some odd things such as Astrology and Miss Universe pageants that would normally not qualify.

Indeed, those domains of discourse are central to the theory that (among things written by real philosophers) I consider to most closely resemble his central theory which is fictionalism. The problem though is that he has presumably read about fictionalism at some point and borrowed aspects, but not actually understood how it works or why. You can tell this because I am a fictionalist - at least in regards to morality and maths

So your "fictionalism" has arbitrary limits? Tell us all about them!

Why are some descriptions useful fictions, but others aren't? Is it because they aren't useful; or because they aren't fictions?

At least the Neopragmatists were consistent in this regard: there are NO privileged descriptions. There are sufficient descriptions (useful fictions?) for particular purposes.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:22 pm Why are some descriptions useful fictions, but others aren't? Is it because they aren't useful; or because they aren't fictions?

This is a question tangential to the point of your post:
Are some useful fictions more useful if you don't know they are fictions? (or try to forget this is your philosophical position on descriptions).
My sense is yes.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:22 pm there are NO privileged descriptions.

What would a privileged description be?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:51 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:22 pm Why are some descriptions useful fictions, but others aren't? Is it because they aren't useful; or because they aren't fictions?

This is a question tangential to the point of your post:
Are some useful fictions more useful if you don't know they are fictions?

Within the domain of discourse (as determined by the utility-function): sure.

Devoid of any context/domain: no.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:51 pm (or try to forget this is your philosophical position on descriptions).
My sense is yes.

Based on what?

Take two interlocutors who share no common purpose who give an account to a particular situation: What makes one description "better" than another?