Aristotle’s 3 Types of Knowledge and Its Relevance Today

Aristotle talks about three types of knowledge in “The Nicomachean Ethics”, which
is one of his best-known work on ethics. Aristotle divides knowledge into three
types, i.e. Episteme, Techne and Phronesis. Episteme means scientific knowledge,
Techne means knowledge of craft and Phronesis means ethical knowledge. There
are modern applications of Aristotle’s 3 types of knowledge to help people become
better leaders, managers as well as tackle situations efficiently. Read this blog to
know more about Aristotle’s 3 types of knowledge and how leaders need to harness
these three types to better their leadership capabilities.

THIS BLOG INCLUDES:

. Techne (Knowledge of Craft)

. Episteme (Scientific Knowledge)
. Phronesis (Ethical Knowledge)
. How Leaders can Harness Aristotle’s 3 Types of Knowledge
. Modern Applications of Aristotle’s 3 Types of Knowledge.

Techne (Knowledge of Craft)
What Aristotle considered as techno was that realm of knowledge which was related
to arts and craft i.e., involving some form of creation.The process of technical or
artistic creation cannot be made possible without employing knowledge of some
kind and this knowledge was techne.  For instance, to create a machine, technical
knowledge is a must and without it the process of creation couldn’t take place. It
uses technical/technological know-how to create such things which are meant to
perform some functions. Therefore, techne is a practical skill which involves the use
of tools to create something concrete. Hope you understood the relevance of the 1st
one in the list of Aristotle’s 3 types of knowledge.  
Episteme (Scientific Knowledge)
There is one other form of knowledge which doesn’t try to create something new
but focuses itself on understanding things which already exist in the universe.
Aristotle names this realm as episteme i.e., scientific knowledge. For instance,
Newton’s law of gravity was not about creating gravity but understanding how it
works. And this is the field of episteme, a kind of knowledge which tries to make
sense of the world around. This wraps the 2nd name in the list of Aristotle’s 3 types
of knowledge. 

Must Read: 7 Best Philosophy Books of All Time

Phronesis (Ethical Knowledge)
Phronesis is the “practical virtue”. It involves use of practical wisdom to make ethical
judgements in your everyday life and to acquire a strong moral character and habits.
So, phronesis refers to that branch of knowledge which probes us to act in a certain
manner with the aim of living a “good life”. It’s the wisdom required to make
judgements when put in a conflicting position. For instance, you are making use
of phronesis or ethical knowledge when you say it’s wrong to lie, or you are not
supposed to hit people. Such moral judgements are not formed in a vacuum but is a
product of the ethical knowledge which you have acquired over time. This completes
the list of Aristotle’s 3 types of knowledge. 

Roger L. Martin, Richard Straub, and Julia Kirby in a blog by Harvard Business Review

on ‘Leaders need to harness Aristotle’s 3 types of knowledge‘ talk about the
combination of these three types of knowledge, i.e. in Episteme, Techne and
Phronesis in ensuring effective leadership. The key reasons behind why leaders need
to harness Aristotle’s 3 types of knowledge is that all these need three different
styles of thinking; Episteme focuses on scientific knowledge, Techne uses arts, tech
and tools and Phronesis utilises rationale and ethical judgement.

By harnessing these three types of knowledge, leaders can make effective decisions
while also distinct themselves from others. Thus, as per Aristotle, a leader can be
more of an epistemic leader than a techne-focused leader, thus using each of these
types of knowledge at the best of one’s abilities, can help foster distinctive
leadership traits. For example, a manager who is more creative thus techne-focused
will be able to curate better creative solutions for problems than focus on scientific
solutions or ethical resolutions. But, on the other hand, a creative manager can also
blend all these realms together and take more holistic decisions, on ethical, creative
as well as scientific parameters.

Modern Applications of Aristotle’s 3 Types of Knowledge.

So, these are the 3 types of knowledge that Aristotle talks about. And you know how
these categories are relevant even today. But the problem is that these categories
have gotten hierarchised with time. In this setup, different kinds of knowledge don’t
have an equal position but are believed to exist in a hierarchy where one kind of
knowledge is given more importance than the other. For
instance episteme and techne which root themselves in facts and physical reality are
given more practical value than phronesis. 

This kind of hierarchisation though in itself problematic becomes all the more
threatening when one branch of knowledge is completely negated. There should be
an understanding that some problems could be solved only by engaging in the
phonetic realm and if epistemic knowledge is employed there it could worsen the
situation. In simpler terms, you can’t expect everything to have a scientific
explanation and in the same manner not everything should be explained by taking a
moral stance. For instance, Newton couldn’t have explained the law of gravity by
using phronesis or ethical knowledge and no one could establish lying as a good or
bad thing by providing a scientific argument. 

So, what is important is to understand which kind of knowledge should be employed

where. For that one needs to first accept that different kinds of knowledge exist and
that they could be used to solve different problems. In your everyday life you will
face problems which will belong to these different realms. And there what you will
need to do is first, comprehend the nature of the problem and  then decide which
approach to take. 

If you are thinking why to understand these different realms then the answer is that
this is what it takes to become a good leader. In a world where everyone dreams of
achieving greatness, understanding these different types of knowledge is what will
take you closer to that goal. The simple reason behind this is that a leader who
governs the masses must know which faculties to use when and where. A leader is
supposed to make the right  decisions by employing the required knowledge and
how are you supposed to do that without knowing what these different types of
knowledge are. So, go on and delve deeper into these ideas because you are going to
need them at every wake of life. And it’s better to be prepared and face life with the
right gears in hand

Metaphysics
What is known to us as metaphysics is what Aristotle called "first philosophy."
Metaphysics involves a study of the universal principles of being, the abstract
qualities of existence itself. Perhaps the starting point of Aristotle's metaphysics is
his rejection of Plato's Theory of Forms. In Plato's theory, material objects are
changeable and not real in themselves; rather, they correspond to an ideal, eternal,
and immutable Form by a common name, and this Form can be perceived only by
the intellect. Thus a thing perceived to be beautiful in this world is in fact an
imperfect manifestation of the Form of Beauty. Aristotle's arguments against this
theory were numerous. Ultimately he rejected Plato's ideas as poetic but empty
language; as a scientist and empiricist he preferred to focus on the reality of the
material world.What is known to us as metaphysics is what Aristotle called "first
philosophy." Metaphysics involves a study of the universal principles of being, the
abstract qualities of existence itself. Perhaps the starting point of Aristotle's
metaphysics is his rejection of Plato's Theory of Forms. In Plato's theory, material
objects are changeable and not real in themselves; rather, they correspond to an
ideal, eternal, and immutable Form by a common name, and this Form can be
perceived only by the intellect. Thus a thing perceived to be beautiful in this world is
in fact an imperfect manifestation of the Form of Beauty. Aristotle's arguments
against this theory were numerous. Ultimately he rejected Plato's ideas as poetic but
empty language; as a scientist and empiricist he preferred to focus on the reality of
the material world.

Metaphysics, or the parts still in existence, spans fourteen books. The early books give
background information and survey the field before Aristotle's time. He also describes
the nature of wisdom: it begins with sense perceptions, which must be translated into
scientific expertise. Such knowledge requires the understanding of both facts and
causes, and wisdom comes only with an understanding of the universal principles and
primary causes built on this science. Aristotle's work in metaphysics is therefore
motivated by this desire for wisdom, which requires the pursuit of knowledge for its
own sake.

By the fourth book he begins to attack some of the sophistry that has contaminated the
field. One point that he dwells on is the law of contradictions, which essentially
asserts that something cannot both be and not be at the same time. In particular, he is
concerned with the relativism and even nihilism that would result from a metaphysics
that allowed contradictions. The relationship between form and matter is another
central problem for Aristotle. He argues that both are substances, but matter is
potential, while form is actual. The two are not separate but intertwined, and actuality
precedes potentiality. Although the actual is produced from the potential, it is the
actual that makes the production possible.

Several of the books covering topics like contrariety, unity, the nature of
mathematical objects, and others are usually neglected, as they show less
originality compared with the key points of the Metaphysics. Book XII, on the
other hand, is usually considered the culmination of Aristotle's work in
metaphysics, and in it he offers his teleological system. Before he draws any
grand conclusions, he begins with the idea of substance, of which there are
three kinds: changeable and perishable (e.g., plants and animals),
changeable and eternal (e.g., heavenly bodies), and immutable. If all
substances are perishable, then ultimate destruction of everything is
inevitable. But Aristotle asserts two imperishable entities: motion and time. If
time were created, then there must have been no time before the creation, but
the very concept of "before" necessitates the concept of time. On the other
hand, as he argued in his works of natural philosophy, the only continuous
motion must be circular. Thus he returns to the idea of the Unmoved Mover,
for only such a being could generate eternal circular motion. The Unmoved
Mover is the ultimate cause of the universe, and it is pure actuality, containing
no matter since it is the very cause of itself. In order for the Mover to be
unmoved itself, it must move in a non-physical way, by inspiring desire.

Aristotle gives the Mover the name of God, but this figure is unlike most
standard conceptions of a divine being. Though Aristotle asserts that it is a
living creature and represents the pinnacle of goodness, it also has no interest
in the world and no recognition of man, for it exists in a completely
transcendent and abstract state. The activity of God–if it can be called such–is
simply knowledge, and this knowledge is purely a knowledge of itself,
because an abstracted being is above sense and experience and can know
only what is best. Some have interpreted this to mean that God, in knowing
itself, implicitly knows everything else, but Aristotle flatly denied this view. In
fact, he believed, for example, that God would have no knowledge of evil.
Thus Aristotle's conception is full of paradoxes. God is the ultimate cause of
everything in the world, but it also remains completely detached.