forum for week of 14 Nov: when we don't want knowledge

I would say when a judge is hearing the arguments of lawyers they are going through such an instance that they are thinking, perceiving and conjecturing meanwhile assuming the whole time that they are not witnessing any true 'knowledge' being brought fourth to them. They have to think deeply and try and appreciate the 'beliefs' of each party and pick and choose certain instances which to them constitute something more along the lines of 'knowledge'. The judge, meanwhile, full knows that when they deliver a verdict they are hardly delivering any 'knowledge', but only trying to piece together what evidence was presented to them to try and create a version of knowledge without aiming to deliver or create any true knowledge.