Aren't the criteria multifarious? It seems so to me. We can divide knowledge, roughly, into know-that and know-how -- but it is a rough division when we come to experience knowledge, I think. We can know-how to act in a play, we can know-that when acting we do this that and the other. We can know-that elements behave in a certain way under certain conditions, and we can know-how to demonstrate said knowledge. — Moliere

Experiential knowledge is prone to such analysis. It' more about how to do deal with ethical sentiments.

It seems to me that the criteria of knowledge are highly specific to not just area of study but even time and place. Acting in a Shakespearean play when Shakespeare was alive would be different from acting in a Shakespearean play today. Doing chemistry in the time of Lavoisier differs from doing chemistry now. It all depends on our social arrangements, in a way, which are highly specific. Lavoisier could prove atoms existed through a fairly basic electrochemical reaction, and that mattered to the time because of the conflict between materialism and religion. Nowadays? You are kind of appealing to different groups. We are divided due to our experiences. — Moliere

The gist of the sentiments is ethical ones.