Taboo "Knowledge" and describe your relation with riding a bicycle.

Sure. I have the ability to manipulate the physical object commonly known as "bicycle" to perform actions which roughly correspond to my wishes.

Taboo "Knowledge" and describe your relation with some field of science you are proficient in.

Sure. I am familiar with a commonly accepted (in this particular field) set of facts about the reality and I can use the usual (to this particular fields) methods to explore the reality further and/or use the methods to figure out the outputs/consequences knowing the inputs/conditions/actions.

Taboo "Knowledge" and describe a religious person's views on god.

Sure. I specifically mentioned mystics, so a mystic has had direct, personal experience of being in the presence of God and of communicating with God.

To continue, I am aware of the difference between procedural knowledge and object knowledge. It's not absolute, of course, and can be argued to be an artifact of the map, not present in the territory. Note that both are subtypes of knowledge.

You can think of both of these types as knowing which levers of reality to press and which dials to turn to get the results you want. You say that object knowledge is "mental model of how the world works" -- but isn't this exactly what procedural knowledge is? You can make the argument that procedural knowledge is "active" and objective knowledge is "passive", but that doesn't look like that major a difference.

Your world model is updated automatically by processes which you do not control.

Partially. My world model is updated both consciously and subconsciously.

So my standing viewpoint is: I don't care what you call it; "knowledge" or "hunch" or "divine inspiration." I care about what your probability distribution over future events is.

Well, just because that's the only thing you care about doesn't mean the rest of the humanity is limited in the same way.

But the thing is that there is only One Correct Way of updating on evidence: Bayes Theorem. If you deviate from that you will have less than optimal predictive power.

The Sacred Truth Not To Be Doubted! :-D

I think you're confusing some basic statistics and real life which is, to put it very mildly, complex.