coberst: "Understanding is a long step beyond knowing"
Yes, I think you're right. Whilst both knowledge and understanding can only ever be limited and localised, the understanding that emerges from knowledge is arguably even less complete. My old biology teacher (many decades ago, alas), used to say, "OK, so you think you know it. Now ask yourself if you understand it". There's more to understanding than simply accumulating facts.
In my view, as I said before, understanding arises through the assimilation of both given and deduced information into a coherent and meaningful vision of reality. I also think that the gulf between information ('data packets', if you like) and understanding, is due not only to an ever incomplete 'data set' but also to limitations of the human mind.
I think we can safely assume that consciousness exists in other lifeforms on this planet, and that some of those lifeforms are intelligent and have a capacity for accumulating knowledge and - dare I say it - understanding. However, given that as true, there will come a point somewhere down the scale of sentient lifeforms at which understanding is totally absent. Data may be stored and utilised without any understanding being present, as in the (presumed) case of an ant. I think it's most probable that human understanding is, likewise, limited by physiology. There may well be other lifeforms (ET) with physiologies that allow a much greater measure of consciousness and understanding.
