I’m looking for philosophy that has the agent as central in characterizing knowledge, but is not as relative as relativism as knowledge will come from algorithms, and before pragmatism. I don’t think algorithms are explained by or restricted to science either historically. They seem cross discipline and broad, and not platonic either.
I think we can go back to the Meno and doubling the square to find an example of an algorithm (I know they come before this too). Meno because an algorithmic road seems presented but then not taken and algorithm is present in one of the founding stories of knowledge.
My tertiary summary of the slave boy in Plato’s Meno is that Socrates believes/demonstrates the boy is able to learn to double the square by being progressively reminded of truths his soul already knows.
Why is that a good example for supporting Plato’s metaphysics of static forms and truths, when what Socrates has done could be seen as simply sharing an algorithm (a clear series of steps)?
(It’s also a great story because it defines what knowledge is, knowledge of eternal forms/truths). I don’t know of a paradigmatic story which defines what algorithmic knowledge is.
I can’t find much in philosophy about algorithms as ways to characterize knowledge and philosophy. And yet they were hugely important to Ancient Greeks, and titans today say no complete definition of algorithm has been given (Yuri Gurevich, a philosophically inclined computer scientist).
Why algorithm and not just fold into pragmatism or relativism? Because relativism seems too against framework (e.g. I want to make algorithm shared and central) and pragmatism took till the 1800s, while algorithms existed to Ancient Greeks and were philosophically important already. Or maybe this is relativism, algorithm relativism where all knowledge is relative to algorithms?