"Other ways of knowing," aka Different Cognitive Styles

[skepticscott]

2. As usual, this discussion is not of much use

Without defining specifically what qualifies as "knowledge", as opposed to simply experience, or the ability to convince oneself of something.

Mitt Romney "knew" that he was going to win the election. Fred Phelps "knows" that god hates fags. Do those (along with a plethora of other examples) qualify as "knowledge" in any meaningful or useful sense, any sense worth mentioning? Sure, you could define "knowledge" so broadly as to include anything that any single individual can convince themselves of, but what would be the point? Under such an umbrella, the delusions of an insane person are just as valid "knowledge" as the most well-supported historical or scientific facts.

And what does it mean to say that an experience is "valid"? Lots of people have "near-death experiences", and the experiences themselves are certainly real, but that doesn't add weight to the claim that they represent an aborted passage to a real afterlife. It may just be that human brains under stress will often behave the same. People may "feel" what seems to them like the love of "god" at a revival meeting, but that doesn't mean that their god actually exists or is showering them with warm fuzzies.