Experiential knowledge is knowledge gained through experience, as opposed to a prior (before experience) knowledge: it can also be contrasted both with propositional (textbook) knowledge, and with practical knowledge.
What is Experiential knowledge?
- Experiential knowledge is cognate to Michael Polanyi's personal knowledge, as well as to Bertrand Russell's contrast of Knowledge by Acquaintance and by Description.
- Carl Rogers stressed the importance of experiential knowledge both for the therapist formulating his or her theories, and for the client in therap both things with which most counsellors would agree.
- As defined by Thomasina Borkman (Emeritus Professor of Sociology, George Mason University) experiential knowledge is the cornerstone of therapy in self-help groups, as opposed to both lay (general) and professional knowledge.
- Sharing in such groups is the narration of significant life experiences in a process through which the knowledge derived thereof is validated by the group and transformed into a corpus that becomes their fundamental resource and product.
- Neville Symington has argued that one of the central features of the narcissist is a shying away from experiential knowledge, in favour of adopting wholesale a ready-made way of living drawn from other people's experience.
To learn more about Experiential knowledge: brainly.com/question/13459074
#SPJ4
The culture of different countries. What may be common in one culture, such as waving in the United States, might be offensive in places like Greece, where putting all five fingers in the air is an offensive gesture.
The answer is d. it rotates in the opposite direction to most other planets.
a. In the prisoners' dilemma game self-interest leads each prisoner to confess. to a breakdown of any agreement that the prisoners might have made before being questioned to an outcome that is not particularly good for either prisoner.
What is prisoners' dilemma game?
The prisoner's dilemma is a common illustration of a game explored in game theory that demonstrates why two logical people could disagree even though it seems to be in their best interests to collaborate.
The possible outcomes:
- If A and B each betray the other, each of them serves two years in prison
- If A betrays B but B remains silent, A will be set free and B will serve three years in prison
- If A remains silent but B betrays A, A will serve three years in prison and B will be set free
- If A and B both remain silent, both of them will serve one year in prison (on the lesser charge).
Learn more about prisoners' dilemma here:
brainly.com/question/22597804
#SPJ4
Answer:
Explanation:
This lack of attention and complete disregard is most likely due to there being a significant gap between the rate at which people listen and the rate at which they think. Individuals think three to four times faster than the speed at which they speak, meaning you could listen at a rate of up to 450 words per minute. Since the speaker can't output this many words, then it makes it very easy for the listener to start getting impatient which causes the mind to wander towards other more stimulating topics/tasks.
