Why understanding is knowledge

While I’m finishing KnowledgePerson.com for its start I would like to tell you more about knowledge concept.

In the "From what?" section I gave its definition – understanding of action within natural limitations is knowledge.

What does it mean for performance?

You can’t perform if:

a) you don’t understand action;
b) you understand action differently;

(a) may happen when you don’t know who (?), what (?), from what (?), why (?), how (?), where (?), when (?), by what (?) acts – in other words when you ask these questions you naturally limit your understanding and thus can see what you have (or not) to perform;
(b) may happen because of words usually have different meanings and to avoid this you should specify their meanings by asking author, for instance.

Important: "naturally limit" means, for example, that any action can’t happen beyond the space (where(?)), time (when(?)), etc. So we are naturally limited in any our actions, but whether we really know the natural limitations (answers to questions)?

Of course this short introduction doesn’t cover all the practical fields of knowledge, but in this way there is a link between knowledge and action, I think.

Any understanding is only a prerequisite to act properly. That is why connection (or precisely message) isn’t only an evidence of who connect whom. If you understand the message in variants you can predict how this connection really works and maybe you can prevent some effects. And this is already management. The set of connections composes a structure or organization to manage.

So, as you can see so-called knowledge management isn’t inscrutable. Every child asks questions to act, but over time we adults lose this ability. Why? Let’s start asking questions and considering the answers whatever we do!