Jonathan,
If I may, I would like to post a small portion of my own entry, explaining why knowledge is inherently fragmentary:
" Bias is fundamental to the construct of knowledge, so it needs to be factored into the
model. Whether it is a particular perspective, or a generic model or pattern inductively
distilled from circumstance, knowledge is a focused distillation of a larger context. Much
as a telescope would give us much deeper depth of vision, but also limit the field of
view. Thus the very process of definition imposes limitations and introduces further
layers of context.
This factor is incorporated in physics as the Uncertainty Principle, though the full
consequences do not seem fully appreciated. Knowledge does not go to infinity,
because it is a function of distinctions and judgements. Measurements, if you prefer. So
combining multitudes of such bits of information cancels out detail, like colors running
together. They can be networked into a larger body of knowledge, much like various
colors can create a picture, if they remain separate and distinct.
What we think of as knowledge is that border between distinction and continuity, as the
making of connections and relations among and between the distinctions, we glean the
broader patterns. The consequence is that broader, generalized perspective does blur
the fine detail and loses some information, just as a detailed view limits the broad
perspective."
