Knowledge, Adaptation and Meaning

I've been thinking recently about knowledge and adaptation.  About six months ago I started getting into Piaget, as well as others who may be labeled "evolutionary epistemologists".  The result of this encounter was that I created a strong link between knowledge and adaptation-specifically the idea that adaptations constitute knowledge about the environment.  

Recently, I've been thinking about the difference between knowledge in its commonsense-sense and adaptation.  I still think there's a strong link between knowledge and adaptation, but I don't think that the two should be considered synonymous.  I think it's incorrect to say that knowledge is inherently adaptive.  Rather, knowledge allows for the spontaneous and flexible creation of adaptive behavior.  For example, if I hear that a certain bridge that I must take on my way to work has washed out, I will use this knowledge to take a different route.  The knowledge about the washed out bridge is not in itself adaptive, but it does allow for adaptive behavior.

What follows is meant to clear up the relation between adaptation, meaning and knowledge.  My goal has been to get to the pure essence of these things-inasmuch as that is possible.  I believe that in our day to day lives, knowledge, meaning and adaptation are tightly and intricately interwoven in incredibly complex ways.  Nevertheless, I feel that what follows sheds light on what would otherwise be just a mess.

What is it about knowledge that allows for it to be used in the creation of adaptive behavior if it is not intrinsically adaptive?  I believe that knowledge can be understood as something that is predictive (or believed to be predictive) about sensory-motor activity.   Returning to the example of the washed out bridge, the knowledge about the washed out bridge is a prediction about possible sensory-motor activity-specifically the sensory motor activity that will occur when one is at the bridge.  

So far I have explained knowledge as something that is predictive (or believed to be predictive-in the case of false knowledge) about potential sensory-motor activity.  This leaves unresolved the main question of how knowledge may be used adaptively.  To resolve this issue, we have to assume that sensory-motor activity itself has meaning.  By meaning I mean that we are able to interpret sensory-motor activity as it relates to our livelihood (and especially our survival).