[unspun]

I would make a distinction between understanding fully (comprehension) and understanding in part (potentially up to and including a "working knowledge"). If what lies beyond our comprehension may be understood in part due to inference, or to the volitional efforts of someone there presenting us knowledge of its nature and substance (Bible happens to call that "glory," literally translated "weight" from Hebrew) then we may know in part (even if "through a glass, darkly").

[LogicWings]

I would make a distinction between understanding fully (comprehension) and understanding in part (potentially up to and including a "working knowledge").

Tracking.

If what lies beyond our comprehension may be understood in part due to inference,

Then you 'comprehend' only to the degree that you may infer. If you 'infer' it isn't 'beyond.'

to the volitional efforts of someone there presenting us knowledge of its nature and substance (Bible happens to call that "glory," literally translated "weight" from Hebrew)

So, because somebody else said it is so, it is so? How do I verify this other than to accept it? If I can verify it, then I'm not dependent upon their 'presenting us knowledge' and if I can't then I have to suspect its veracity.

then we may know in part (even if "through a glass, darkly").

Reminds me of the 3 blind men and the elephant, (can't get any darker than that). If you only know part, you don't really know what you know. Kind of sums it up for me. So many people only have a partial picture and want to launch off telling everybody else how to live. I'm tired of this. Prove it all to me or shut up.