Recently I have been pondering a theory of knowledge and was
wondering what philosopher(s), if any, had a similar theory.
My theory states that all knowledge is finite due to the
necessity of experience to generate knowledge and the finite number of
particulars and universals in the phenomenal world.
This theory denies the existence of a noumena, a “God’s-eye
view”, and simply focuses on the phenomenal world of sensory experience.
The Phenomenological world only has a finite number of
particulars and universals (P&U), and this number can be simplified by
introduced categories. Once an ontology is a created, that ontology would end
at some point as the world at one point in time only has a finite number of P&U,
a finite number of occurrences, and a finite number of “subjective perceptions.”
(Ergo, if any object can be perceived differently by different
people/animals/modes of conscious thought otherwise, then there are only a
finite number of beings, and therefore a finite number of perceptions.)
In this manner, the phenomenal world is objective in its own
nature and is perceived in different ways by each individual conscious. However,
this number of perceptions, while exponential, is still finite.
The Conceptual world is based off of the experiences from
the phenomenal world. The mind has the ability to transform this information
from the experiences. So, if this world has P, then the person experiences P
and registers it in the mind. The mind can then transform P in different ways,
such as imagining –P, 2P, PxP, and every logical transformation past that. However,
there are only a finite number of transformations a person can do before the
next transformation becomes reflective of a previous one.
In the same way, a world where this is only a finite number
of P&U can only have a finite number of combinations, albeit exponential.
For example, where A, B, and C exist, they can only be combined in so many
different ways, such as ABC, ACB, CAB, and so on in as many permutations as
logically possible.
Once this is done with every subjective perception of every
P&U, then you would have a complete ontology of all possible knowledge.
This also explains fantastical conceptions, as they are
simply one of the novel combinations of preexisting things in the world. For example,
the unicorn, a fantastical creature that few, if any, people have directly
experienced, is simply a combination of a white horse and a horn, two things
that are common in the phenomenal world. This can be further transformed with
universals such as elegance, beauty, and magical properties, but these are also
permutations of universals that exist in the real world. Elegance and beauty
are universals found in phenomenal objects, and magic is simply a permutation
of the laws of natural science (so if immortality is magical, the immortality
is simply the negation of mortality, which is a phenomenal experience.)
All in all, every permutation of phenomenal experience can
logically be mapped out to yield a finite number, creating a complete ontology
of knowledge. This ontology would be finite, and thus, knowledge is finite.
If you could recommend a philosopher or philosophers that
agree with this, or even ones that proves this theory to be bunk, I would
greatly appreciate it.
