Declarative knowledge: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 09:27, 16 April 2023

In epistemology, declarative knowledge (also known as propositional knowledge, knowing-that, descriptive knowledge,^[1]^[2] or constative knowledge)^[3]^[4] is knowledge that can be expressed in a declarative sentence or an indicative proposition.^[5] "Knowing-that" can be contrasted with "knowing-how" (also known as "procedural knowledge"), which is knowing how to perform some task, including knowing how to perform it skillfully.^[1]

It can also be contrasted with "knowing of" (better known as "knowledge by acquaintance"), which is non-propositional knowledge of something which is constituted by familiarity with it or direct awareness of it. By definition, descriptive knowledge is knowledge of particular facts, as potentially expressed by our theories, concepts, principles, schemas, and ideas.^[6] The descriptive knowledge that a person possesses constitute their understanding of the world and the way that it works.^[6]

The distinction between knowing-how and knowing-that was brought to prominence in epistemology by Gilbert Ryle who used it in his book The Concept of Mind.^[7] For Ryle, the former differs in its emphasis and purpose, since it is primarily practical knowledge, whereas the latter focuses on indicative or explanatory knowledge.^[8]

Definition and semantic field

Declarative knowledge is an awareness or understanding of facts. It can be expressed through spoken and written language using declarative sentences and can thus be acquired through verbal communication.^[9]^[10]^[11] Examples of declarative knowledge are knowing "that Princess Diana died in 1997" or "that Goethe was 83 when he finished writing Faust".^[9] Declarative knowledge involves mental representations in the form of concepts, ideas, theories, and general rules. Through these representations, the person stands in a relationship to a particular aspect of reality by depicting what it is like. Declarative knowledge tends to be context-independent: it is not tied to any specific use and may be employed for many different tasks.^[12]^[13]^[14] It includes a wide range of phenomena and encompasses both specific knowledge of individual facts, for example, that the atomic mass of gold is 196.97 u, as well as general laws, for example, that the color of leaves of some trees changes in autumn.^[15] Due to its verbal nature, declarative knowledge can be stored in media like books and harddisks. It may also be processed using computers and plays a key role in various forms of artificial intelligence, for example, in the knowledge base of expert systems.^[16]

Terms like theoretical knowledge, descriptive knowledge, propositional knowledge, and knowledge-that are used as synonyms of declarative knowledge and express its different aspects. Theoretical knowledge is knowledge of what is the case, in the past, present, or future independent of a practical outlook concerning how to achieve a specific goal. Descriptive knowledge is knowledge that involves descriptions of actual or speculative objects, events, or concepts. Propositional knowledge asserts that a certain proposition or claim about the world is true. This is often expressed using a that-clause, as in "knowing that kangaroos hop" or "knowing that 2 + 2 = 4". For this reason, it is also referred to as knowledge-that.^[17] Declarative knowledge contrasts with non-declarative knowledge, which does not concern the explicit comprehension of factual information regarding the world. In this regard, practical knowledge in the form of skills and knowledge by acquaintance as a type of experiential familiarity are not forms of declarative knowledge.^[18]^[19]^[20] The main discipline investigating declarative knowledge is called epistemology. It tries to determine its nature, how it arises, what value it has, and what its limits are.^[21]^[22]^[23]

References

^ ^a ^b Burgin, Mark (2016). Theory of Knowledge: Structures and Processes. Kackensack, NJ: World Scientific. p. 48. ISBN 9789814522670.
^ Sadegh-Zadeh, Kazem (2015). Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine, 2nd edition. Dordrecht: Springer. p. 475. ISBN 9789401795784.
^ Carl, Wolfgang (2014). The First-Person Point of View. Walter de Gruyter. p. 147. ISBN 9783110362855.
^ Murphy, Mark; Fleming, Ted (2010). Habermas, Critical Theory and Education. Routledge. p. 107. ISBN 9781135224301.
^ Tokuhama-Espinosa, Tracey (2011). Mind, Brain, and Education Science: A Comprehensive Guide to the New Brain-Based Teaching. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. p. 255. ISBN 9780393706079.
^ ^a ^b Holyoak, Keith; Morrison, Robert (2005). The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 371. ISBN 0521824176.
^ Jason Stanley and Timothy Williamson, "Knowing How", Journal of Philosophy, 98(8): 411–444, 2001.
^ D'Cruz, Heather; Jacobs, Struan; Schoo, Adrian (2016). Knowledge-in-Practice in the Caring Professions: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Abingdon: Routledge. p. 19. ISBN 9780754672821.
^ ^a ^b Colman, Andrew M. (1 January 2009). "declarative knowledge". A Dictionary of Psychology. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-953406-7.
^ Woolfolk, Anita E.; Hughes, Malcolm; Walkup, Vivienne (2008). Psychology in Education. Pearson Longman. p. 307. ISBN 978-1-4058-3541-1.
^ Strube, G.; Wender, K. F. (1 October 1993). The Cognitive Psychology of Knowledge. Elsevier. p. 354. ISBN 978-0-08-086755-7.
^ Morrison, Associate Professor of English Robert (18 April 2005). The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning. Cambridge University Press. p. 371. ISBN 978-0-521-82417-0.
^ Cite error: The named reference Reif2008 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Zagzebski 1999, p. 93.
^ Woolfolk, Anita; Margetts, Kay (25 July 2012). Educational Psychology Australian Edition. Pearson Higher Education AU. p. 251. ISBN 978-1-4425-5145-9.
^
- "knowledge". The American Heritage Dictionary. HarperCollins. Retrieved 25 October 2022.
- Magee, Bryan; Popper, Karl R. (1971). "Conversation with Karl Popper". In Magee, Bryan (ed.). Modern British philosophy. New York: St. Martin's Press. pp. 74–75. ISBN 978-0-19-283047-0. OCLC 314039. Popper: Putting our ideas into words, or better, writing them down, makes an important difference. ... It is what I call 'knowledge in the objective sense'. Scientific knowledge belongs to it. It is this knowledge which is stored in our libraries rather than our heads. Magee: And you regard the knowledge stored in our libraries as more important than the knowledge stored in our heads. Popper: Much more important, from every point of view
- Walton, Douglas N. (January 2005). "Pragmatic and idealized models of knowledge and ignorance". American Philosophical Quarterly. 42 (1): 59–69 (59, 64). JSTOR 20010182. It is a pervasive assumption in recent analytical philosophy that knowledge can be defined as a modality representing a rational agent's true and consistent beliefs. Such views are based on rationality assumptions. One is that knowledge can only consist of true propositions. This way of speaking is sharply at odds with the way we speak about knowledge, for example, in computing, where a so-called knowledge base can be a database, that is, a set of data that has been collected and is thought to consist of true propositions, even though, realistically speaking, many of them might later be shown to be false or untenable. ... The pragmatic account of knowledge starts with a knowledge system, meaning a working system with an agent having a database. ... The notion of a search can be a social one, in many instances. A group of agents can be engaged in the search, and some of them can know things that others do not know.
- Leondes, Cornelius T. (26 September 2001). Expert Systems: The Technology of Knowledge Management and Decision Making for the 21st Century. Elsevier. p. 804. ISBN 978-0-08-053145-8.
- Kent, Allen; Williams, James G. (18 November 1993). Encyclopedia of Microcomputers: Volume 13 - Optical Disks to Production Scheduling. CRC Press. p. 295. ISBN 978-0-8247-2711-6.
^
- Sadegh-Zadeh, Kazem (28 September 2011). Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 450–1. ISBN 978-94-007-2260-6.
- Burstein, Frada; Holsapple, Clyde W. (22 January 2008). Handbook on Decision Support Systems 1: Basic Themes. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 44–5. ISBN 978-3-540-48713-5.
- Hetherington, Stephen. "Knowledge". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 1b. Knowledge-That. Retrieved 29 March 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
- Sadegh-Zadeh, Kazem (6 April 2015). Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine. Springer. p. 470. ISBN 978-94-017-9579-1.
^ Colman, Andrew M. (1 January 2009). "non-declarative knowledge". A Dictionary of Psychology. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-953406-7.
^ Cite error: The named reference Pavese2023-introduction was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Cite error: The named reference Klauer2016 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Truncellito, David A. "Epistemology". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 8 March 2023.
^ Moser, Paul K. (27 October 2005). The Oxford Handbook of Epistemology. Oxford University Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-19-020818-9.
^ Steup, Matthias; Neta, Ram (2020). "Epistemology". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2.3 Knowing Facts: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 8 April 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: location (link)

External links

Knowledge by Acquaintance vs. Description. Entry from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Knowledge How. Entry from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

This philosophy-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

[:Burgin-1] Burgin, Mark (2016). Theory of Knowledge: Structures and Processes. Kackensack, NJ: World Scientific. p. 48. ISBN 9789814522670.

[2] Sadegh-Zadeh, Kazem (2015). Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine, 2nd edition. Dordrecht: Springer. p. 475. ISBN 9789401795784.

[3] Carl, Wolfgang (2014). The First-Person Point of View. Walter de Gruyter. p. 147. ISBN 9783110362855.

[4] Murphy, Mark; Fleming, Ted (2010). Habermas, Critical Theory and Education. Routledge. p. 107. ISBN 9781135224301.

[5] Tokuhama-Espinosa, Tracey (2011). Mind, Brain, and Education Science: A Comprehensive Guide to the New Brain-Based Teaching. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. p. 255. ISBN 9780393706079.

[Cambridge_UP-6] Holyoak, Keith; Morrison, Robert (2005). The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 371. ISBN 0521824176.

[7] Jason Stanley and Timothy Williamson, "Knowing How", Journal of Philosophy, 98(8): 411–444, 2001.

[8] D'Cruz, Heather; Jacobs, Struan; Schoo, Adrian (2016). Knowledge-in-Practice in the Caring Professions: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Abingdon: Routledge. p. 19. ISBN 9780754672821.

[Colman2009-9] Colman, Andrew M. (1 January 2009). "declarative knowledge". A Dictionary of Psychology. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-953406-7.

[Woolfolk2008-10] Woolfolk, Anita E.; Hughes, Malcolm; Walkup, Vivienne (2008). Psychology in Education. Pearson Longman. p. 307. ISBN 978-1-4058-3541-1.

[11] Strube, G.; Wender, K. F. (1 October 1993). The Cognitive Psychology of Knowledge. Elsevier. p. 354. ISBN 978-0-08-086755-7.

[Morrison2005-12] Morrison, Associate Professor of English Robert (18 April 2005). The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning. Cambridge University Press. p. 371. ISBN 978-0-521-82417-0.

[Reif2008-13] Cite error: The named reference Reif2008 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[FOOTNOTEZagzebski199993-14] Zagzebski 1999, p. 93.

[Woolfolk2012-15] Woolfolk, Anita; Margetts, Kay (25 July 2012). Educational Psychology Australian Edition. Pearson Higher Education AU. p. 251. ISBN 978-1-4425-5145-9.

[16] 
"knowledge". The American Heritage Dictionary. HarperCollins. Retrieved 25 October 2022.
Magee, Bryan; Popper, Karl R. (1971). "Conversation with Karl Popper". In Magee, Bryan (ed.). Modern British philosophy. New York: St. Martin's Press. pp. 74–75. ISBN 978-0-19-283047-0. OCLC 314039. Popper: Putting our ideas into words, or better, writing them down, makes an important difference. ... It is what I call 'knowledge in the objective sense'. Scientific knowledge belongs to it. It is this knowledge which is stored in our libraries rather than our heads. Magee: And you regard the knowledge stored in our libraries as more important than the knowledge stored in our heads. Popper: Much more important, from every point of view
Walton, Douglas N. (January 2005). "Pragmatic and idealized models of knowledge and ignorance". American Philosophical Quarterly. 42 (1): 59–69 (59, 64). JSTOR 20010182. It is a pervasive assumption in recent analytical philosophy that knowledge can be defined as a modality representing a rational agent's true and consistent beliefs. Such views are based on rationality assumptions. One is that knowledge can only consist of true propositions. This way of speaking is sharply at odds with the way we speak about knowledge, for example, in computing, where a so-called knowledge base can be a database, that is, a set of data that has been collected and is thought to consist of true propositions, even though, realistically speaking, many of them might later be shown to be false or untenable. ... The pragmatic account of knowledge starts with a knowledge system, meaning a working system with an agent having a database. ... The notion of a search can be a social one, in many instances. A group of agents can be engaged in the search, and some of them can know things that others do not know.
Leondes, Cornelius T. (26 September 2001). Expert Systems: The Technology of Knowledge Management and Decision Making for the 21st Century. Elsevier. p. 804. ISBN 978-0-08-053145-8.
Kent, Allen; Williams, James G. (18 November 1993). Encyclopedia of Microcomputers: Volume 13 - Optical Disks to Production Scheduling. CRC Press. p. 295. ISBN 978-0-8247-2711-6.

[17] "knowledge". The American Heritage Dictionary. HarperCollins. Retrieved 25 October 2022.

[18] Magee, Bryan; Popper, Karl R. (1971). "Conversation with Karl Popper". In Magee, Bryan (ed.). Modern British philosophy. New York: St. Martin's Press. pp. 74–75. ISBN 978-0-19-283047-0. OCLC 314039. Popper: Putting our ideas into words, or better, writing them down, makes an important difference. ... It is what I call 'knowledge in the objective sense'. Scientific knowledge belongs to it. It is this knowledge which is stored in our libraries rather than our heads. Magee: And you regard the knowledge stored in our libraries as more important than the knowledge stored in our heads. Popper: Much more important, from every point of view

[19] Walton, Douglas N. (January 2005). "Pragmatic and idealized models of knowledge and ignorance". American Philosophical Quarterly. 42 (1): 59–69 (59, 64). JSTOR 20010182. It is a pervasive assumption in recent analytical philosophy that knowledge can be defined as a modality representing a rational agent's true and consistent beliefs. Such views are based on rationality assumptions. One is that knowledge can only consist of true propositions. This way of speaking is sharply at odds with the way we speak about knowledge, for example, in computing, where a so-called knowledge base can be a database, that is, a set of data that has been collected and is thought to consist of true propositions, even though, realistically speaking, many of them might later be shown to be false or untenable. ... The pragmatic account of knowledge starts with a knowledge system, meaning a working system with an agent having a database. ... The notion of a search can be a social one, in many instances. A group of agents can be engaged in the search, and some of them can know things that others do not know.

[20] Leondes, Cornelius T. (26 September 2001). Expert Systems: The Technology of Knowledge Management and Decision Making for the 21st Century. Elsevier. p. 804. ISBN 978-0-08-053145-8.

[21] Kent, Allen; Williams, James G. (18 November 1993). Encyclopedia of Microcomputers: Volume 13 - Optical Disks to Production Scheduling. CRC Press. p. 295. ISBN 978-0-8247-2711-6.

[17] 
Sadegh-Zadeh, Kazem (28 September 2011). Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 450–1. ISBN 978-94-007-2260-6.
Burstein, Frada; Holsapple, Clyde W. (22 January 2008). Handbook on Decision Support Systems 1: Basic Themes. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 44–5. ISBN 978-3-540-48713-5.
Hetherington, Stephen. "Knowledge". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 1b. Knowledge-That. Retrieved 29 March 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
Sadegh-Zadeh, Kazem (6 April 2015). Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine. Springer. p. 470. ISBN 978-94-017-9579-1.

[23] Sadegh-Zadeh, Kazem (28 September 2011). Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 450–1. ISBN 978-94-007-2260-6.

[24] Burstein, Frada; Holsapple, Clyde W. (22 January 2008). Handbook on Decision Support Systems 1: Basic Themes. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 44–5. ISBN 978-3-540-48713-5.

[25] Hetherington, Stephen. "Knowledge". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 1b. Knowledge-That. Retrieved 29 March 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: location (link)

[26] Sadegh-Zadeh, Kazem (6 April 2015). Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine. Springer. p. 470. ISBN 978-94-017-9579-1.

[18] Colman, Andrew M. (1 January 2009). "non-declarative knowledge". A Dictionary of Psychology. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-953406-7.

[Pavese2023-introduction-19] Cite error: The named reference Pavese2023-introduction was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[Klauer2016-20] Cite error: The named reference Klauer2016 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[21] Truncellito, David A. "Epistemology". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 8 March 2023.

[22] Moser, Paul K. (27 October 2005). The Oxford Handbook of Epistemology. Oxford University Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-19-020818-9.

[23] Steup, Matthias; Neta, Ram (2020). "Epistemology". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2.3 Knowing Facts: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 8 April 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: location (link)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 The distinction between knowing-how and knowing-that was brought to prominence in [[epistemology]] by [[Gilbert Ryle]] who used it in his book ''[[The Concept of Mind]]''.<ref>[[Jason Stanley]] and [[Timothy Williamson]], "Knowing How", ''[[Journal of Philosophy]]'', '''98'''(8): 411–444, 2001.</ref> For Ryle, the former differs in its emphasis and purpose, since it is primarily [[practical knowledge]], whereas the latter focuses on indicative or explanatory knowledge.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Knowledge-in-Practice in the Caring Professions: Multidisciplinary Perspectives|last=D'Cruz|first=Heather|last2=Jacobs|first2=Struan|last3=Schoo|first3=Adrian|publisher=Routledge|year=2016|isbn=9780754672821|location=Abingdon|pages=19}}</ref>
+== Definition and semantic field ==
+Declarative knowledge is an [[awareness]] or [[understanding]] of [[fact]]s. It can be expressed through spoken and written language using declarative sentences and can thus be acquired through [[verbal communication]].<ref name="Colman2009"/><ref name="Woolfolk2008">{{cite book |last1=Woolfolk |first1=Anita E. |last2=Hughes |first2=Malcolm |last3=Walkup |first3=Vivienne |title=Psychology in Education |date=2008 |publisher=Pearson Longman |isbn=978-1-4058-3541-1 |page=307 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=56bOkxXZXKYC&pg=PA307 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Strube |first1=G. |last2=Wender |first2=K. F. |title=The Cognitive Psychology of Knowledge |date=1 October 1993 |publisher=Elsevier |isbn=978-0-08-086755-7 |page=354 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=V1DFcqt1MXAC&pg=PA354 |language=en}}</ref> Examples of declarative knowledge are knowing "that [[Princess Diana]] died in 1997" or "that [[Goethe]] was 83 when he finished writing [[Faust]]".<ref name="Colman2009">{{cite book |last1=Colman |first1=Andrew M. |title=A Dictionary of Psychology |date=1 January 2009 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-953406-7 |url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095705926;jsessionid=A19D30BFCF6E02A0F21A87B805F10DEE |language=en |chapter=declarative knowledge}}</ref> Declarative knowledge involves [[Mental state|mental representations]] in the form of [[concept]]s, ideas, theories, and general rules. Through these representations, the person stands in a relationship to a particular aspect of reality by depicting what it is like. Declarative knowledge tends to be context-independent: it is not tied to any specific use and may be employed for many different tasks.<ref name="Morrison2005">{{cite book |last1=Morrison |first1=Associate Professor of English Robert |title=The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning |date=18 April 2005 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-82417-0 |page=371 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=znbkHaC8QeMC&pg=PA371 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Reif2008"/>{{sfn|Zagzebski|1999|p=93}} It includes a wide range of phenomena and encompasses both specific knowledge of individual facts, for example, that the atomic mass of gold is 196.97 [[Dalton (unit)|u]], as well as general laws, for example, that the color of leaves of some trees changes in autumn.<ref name="Woolfolk2012">{{cite book |last1=Woolfolk |first1=Anita |last2=Margetts |first2=Kay |title=Educational Psychology Australian Edition |date=25 July 2012 |publisher=Pearson Higher Education AU |isbn=978-1-4425-5145-9 |page=251 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=whziBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA251 |language=en}}</ref> Due to its verbal nature, declarative knowledge can be stored in [[Media (communication)|media]] like books and [[harddisk]]s. It may also be processed using computers and plays a key role in various forms of [[artificial intelligence]], for example, in the [[knowledge base]] of [[expert systems]].<ref>{{multiref2 |1={{cite encyclopedia |publisher=HarperCollins |encyclopedia=The American Heritage Dictionary |title=knowledge |url=https://www.ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=knowledge |access-date=25 October 2022}} |2={{cite book |last1=Magee |first1=Bryan |author1-link=Bryan Magee |last2=Popper |first2=Karl R. |author2-link=Karl Popper |date=1971 |chapter=Conversation with Karl Popper |editor-last=Magee |editor-first=Bryan |title=Modern British philosophy |location=New York |publisher=St. Martin's Press |pages=[https://archive.org/details/modernbritishphi0000mage/page/74 74–75] |oclc=314039 |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/modernbritishphi0000mage/page/66 |chapter-url-access=registration |isbn=978-0-19-283047-0 |quote=Popper: Putting our ideas into words, or better, writing them down, makes an important difference. ... It is what I call 'knowledge in the objective sense'. Scientific knowledge belongs to it. It is this knowledge which is stored in our libraries rather than our heads. Magee: And you regard the knowledge stored in our libraries as more important than the knowledge stored in our heads. Popper: Much more important, from every point of view}} |3={{cite journal |last=Walton |first=Douglas N. |author-link=Douglas N. Walton |date=January 2005 |title=Pragmatic and idealized models of knowledge and ignorance |journal=[[American Philosophical Quarterly]] |volume=42 |issue=1 |pages=59–69 (59, 64) |jstor=20010182 |quote=It is a pervasive assumption in recent analytical philosophy that knowledge can be defined as a modality representing a rational agent's true and consistent beliefs. Such views are based on rationality assumptions. One is that knowledge can only consist of true propositions. This way of speaking is sharply at odds with the way we speak about knowledge, for example, in computing, where a so-called knowledge base can be a database, that is, a set of data that has been collected and is thought to consist of true propositions, even though, realistically speaking, many of them might later be shown to be false or untenable. ... The pragmatic account of knowledge starts with a knowledge system, meaning a working system with an agent having a database. ... The notion of a search can be a social one, in many instances. A group of agents can be engaged in the search, and some of them can know things that others do not know.}} |4={{cite book |last1=Leondes |first1=Cornelius T. |title=Expert Systems: The Technology of Knowledge Management and Decision Making for the 21st Century |date=26 September 2001 |publisher=Elsevier |isbn=978-0-08-053145-8 |page=804 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5kSamKhS560C&pg=PA804 |language=en}} |5={{cite book |last1=Kent |first1=Allen |last2=Williams |first2=James G. |title=Encyclopedia of Microcomputers: Volume 13 - Optical Disks to Production Scheduling |date=18 November 1993 |publisher=CRC Press |isbn=978-0-8247-2711-6 |page=295 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Rx3hqGdXcooC&pg=PA295 |language=en}}}}</ref>
+Terms like theoretical knowledge, descriptive knowledge, propositional knowledge, and knowledge-that are used as synonyms of declarative knowledge and express its different aspects. Theoretical knowledge is knowledge of what is the case, in the past, present, or future independent of a practical outlook concerning how to achieve a specific goal. Descriptive knowledge is knowledge that involves [[description]]s of actual or speculative objects, events, or concepts. Propositional knowledge asserts that a certain [[proposition]] or claim about the world is true. This is often expressed using a that-clause, as in "knowing that kangaroos hop" or "knowing that 2 + 2 = 4". For this reason, it is also referred to as ''knowledge-that''.<ref>{{multiref2 |1={{cite book |last1=Sadegh-Zadeh |first1=Kazem |title=Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine |date=28 September 2011 |publisher=Springer Science & Business Media |isbn=978-94-007-2260-6 |pages=450-1 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=25W4gBfpX5QC&pg=PA450 |language=en}} |2={{cite book |last1=Burstein |first1=Frada |last2=Holsapple |first2=Clyde W. |title=Handbook on Decision Support Systems 1: Basic Themes |date=22 January 2008 |publisher=Springer Science & Business Media |isbn=978-3-540-48713-5 |pages=44-5 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=q_3sRkRKZQwC&pg=PA44 |language=en}} |3={{cite web |last1=Hetherington |first1=Stephen |title=Knowledge |url=https://iep.utm.edu/knowledg/#SH1b |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=29 March 2023 |location=1b. Knowledge-That}} |4={{cite book |last1=Sadegh-Zadeh |first1=Kazem |title=Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine |date=6 April 2015 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-94-017-9579-1 |page=470 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Ui8GCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA470 |language=en}} }}</ref> Declarative knowledge contrasts with non-declarative knowledge, which does not concern the explicit comprehension of factual [[information]] regarding the world. In this regard, [[practical knowledge]] in the form of [[skill]]s and [[knowledge by acquaintance]] as a type of experiential familiarity are not forms of declarative knowledge.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Colman |first1=Andrew M. |title=A Dictionary of Psychology |date=1 January 2009 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-953406-7 |url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100237349 |language=en |chapter=non-declarative knowledge}}</ref><ref name="Pavese2023-introduction"/><ref name="Klauer2016"/> The main discipline investigating declarative knowledge is called [[epistemology]]. It tries to determine its nature, how it arises, what value it has, and what its limits are.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Truncellito |first1=David A. |title=Epistemology |url=https://iep.utm.edu/epistemo/ |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=8 March 2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Moser |first1=Paul K. |title=The Oxford Handbook of Epistemology |date=27 October 2005 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-020818-9 |page=3 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5NJjAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA3 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Steup |first1=Matthias |last2=Neta |first2=Ram |title=Epistemology |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/#KnowFact |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=8 April 2023 |location=2.3 Knowing Facts |date=2020}}</ref>
 ==See also==

v t e Epistemology
Epistemologists	Thomas Aquinas Augustine of Hippo William Alston Robert Audi A. J. Ayer George Berkeley Laurence BonJour Gilles Deleuze Keith DeRose René Descartes John Dewey Fred Dretske Edmund Gettier Alvin Goldman Nelson Goodman Paul Grice Anil Gupta Susan Haack David Hume Immanuel Kant Søren Kierkegaard Peter Klein Saul Kripke Hilary Kornblith David Lewis John Locke G. E. Moore John McDowell Robert Nozick Alvin Plantinga Plato Duncan Pritchard James Pryor Hilary Putnam W. V. O. Quine Thomas Reid Bertrand Russell Gilbert Ryle Wilfrid Sellars Susanna Siegel Ernest Sosa P. F. Strawson Baruch Spinoza Timothy Williamson Ludwig Wittgenstein Nicholas Wolterstorff Vienna Circle more...
Theories	Coherentism Constructivism Contextualism Empiricism Evolutionary epistemology Fallibilism Feminist epistemology Fideism Foundationalism Holism Infinitism Innatism Naïve realism Naturalized epistemology Phenomenalism Positivism Rationalism Reductionism Reliabilism Representational realism Skepticism Transcendental idealism
Concepts	A priori knowledge A posteriori knowledge Analysis Analytic–synthetic distinction Belief Common sense Descriptive knowledge Exploratory thought Epistemic injustice Epistemic virtue Gettier problem Induction Internalism and externalism Justification Knowledge Objectivity Privileged access Problem of induction Problem of other minds Perception Procedural knowledge Proposition Regress argument Simplicity Truth more...
Related articles	Outline of epistemology Faith and rationality Formal epistemology Metaepistemology Philosophy of perception Philosophy of science Social epistemology Virtue epistemology
Category Task Force Stubs Discussion