Well there are several assumptions to be made here ifc: First: knowledge is abstract. We cannot weight it or jjudge its quantity. It is created (as scientists believe) within the endless nerve pathways within our brain. Two: Culture is definable but that is subject to debate. Howveer it can be defined on certain dimensions(for our assumption, we assume its definable) and third: Society, the space within which these two aspects of humankind are created, needs to be abstract. If society's dimensions could be foraged and defined, society would become definable- thus subjecting it to doctrines that are SPECIFIC- something us humans are afraid of. When a man is born (and i mean man to be man AND woman as per the already so confusing english language), he is subjected to culture first. The culture of the household- mainly the beliefs in it, the religion (if any), the residents' behaviour. The newborn's growth is accompanied by a rapid growth of perception. The growing child uses the five senses and uses it's curiosity to fuel its hunger for everything around it. Within the walls of the house the child learns what others do. His motive is not to analyse what is being learnt, nor to accumulate knowledge. There is no motvie. We are forced. The first things we learn are Dos and Donts. There really isnt any reason why we want to learn it either. The next step, once we cross perhaps the age of 10 is a bit of an understanding of HOW things work. But why teach US all these things? The answer lies in survival. Humas are the only species constantly at battle amongs each other for their survival. Parents want their future generation to survive and live long and prosper, a natural instinct among ALL living beings. Thus it seems our culture is itself shaped by the insticnt to survive. Humas' culture have several key similarities everywhere: they're predominantly seen within the lifestyle. Perhaps a reason why we choose to discriminate against people is because of their different culture0- or a different mode of lifestyle- shaped by a totally different mode to survive. Once that insticnt is carved into our daily activities, that becomes our culture- thus our first and ever recurring source for knowledge. Next comes society. What a man sees within his house, will be at a striking contrast to what he sees outside. Thus along comes the state of analysis, dilemma- where an indvidual starts to see what the society as a whole is doing- in today's context- the WORLD. Ideologies, views, even lifestyles that were previously so strictly followed can be changed from contact with other societies. Society plays the second most key role beause it is the mass- the ruling body- the body that shapes things- it is also the most vulnerable body to outside influences. Without any dimensions as assumed above- it has no barries for inflow and outflow of influence. Thus the individual cultural aspects that make up society is changed when past individuals' cultural aspects change and when the newcomer to the society sees this change first hand (unlike those who have lived only in one type of a cultural environment)- his knowledge is changed again. Thus knowledge changes when society is in a PROCESS of change- as is witnessed in these times when information exchange is faster than ever. Then there's human curiosity. The one that perhaps separates us from other beings. Curiosity may not seem to be tied to the insticnt of survival but, we CARE to live to be able to further our curosity. It would be sad if we didnt have a bit of gurantee that we would be unalbe to further our research of quantam mechanics or genetics or literature or what not. Also, everything we do, we have claimed so far to be towards the benefit of society. An artitst creates his magic- to enlighten and intrigue people's minds- so that they may enjoy life, SURVIVE IN A BETTER WAY etc. etc etc..Thus even curosity isnt spared from this burden of insticntive nature called survival. But does that limit the sources of our knowledge. We havent even come to the conclusion of what knowelge is. If the ideas and methods of survival are what constitute the BASIC BASIC building blocks of human knowledge, then we might as well say that what we learn from society is how to survive. So from the moment we are born, to the moment we die- we concern ourselves with our extinction. But if society (and our culture) is supposed to change our knowledge, and the only thing we ever learn is methods for survival, how is knowledge ever created? That may be rhetorical and even a useless question, but the basic idea as i see it is that: Knowledge derived through the means of soceity and culture are delivered primarily via the desire to survvie amongst the only species that propages knowledge within its communal realm. This could be total s#1t, but i was bored like never before. My exams are done. no work today so thought i'd waste my time diving into some interesting topics ans share my understanding. heheheh whats your major by the way? mine is the second highest in the hiearchy of "KNOWLEDGE"