Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang
and pure research in science,fundamentalthrough government or privatewhethergrants, is in fact justified through itssectorusefulness in the development of newsupposedIs this belief true, though? Projecttechnologies.was a 1960s study commissionedHindsightthe US Department of Defense to identifybyfactors that led to successful research andtheprogrammes. Part of this was totechnologythe relationship between scientificunderstandand technological innovation. Projectresearchwas among the earliest and mostHindsightstudies of its kind and introduced theambitiousof technology studies as a dedicated field offielddistinct from science. The study foundenquiry,scientific research contributed to only 9%thatthe key events that led to the developmentofsuccessful technology programmes.ofevents were responsible for theTechnological91%. What is the difference betweenotherand scientific events? Accordingtechnologicalthis study, science was defined as theoreticaltoexperimental studies of unexplainedorwhile technology was defined asphenomena,capability to perform specific engineeringthewith known phenomena.techniqueshistorians of technology it is widely acceptedAmongscience owes more to the steam engine than thethatengine owes to science … . Science is appliedsteammore than technology is applied science.technologySergio Sismondo’s words, above.Considerwhat extent would you agree, and is thisTochanging over time? Why do werelationshipto concern ourselves with making acontinuebetween science and technology? Adistinctionof it has to do with questions of funding,partand epistemic power. We celebrateprestigeinventors for their genius, but even onefamousof “The Big Bang Theory” will suggestepisodeis a perceived power differential betweenthereand engineers, and the kinds ofscientistsproduced by each. It is an equationknowledgeKnowledge outside the scope ofI.3technologyadvances in nanotechnology to machineFromand neural networks, the scope oflearningcan appear relentlessly expanding.technologywe talk about the limits of technology,Whenis often a conversation about practicalitsuch as the limits of computationallimitations,that will—the story goes—one daypower,be overcome.soona computer beats the human championWhenthe game of chess, as is becoming more andatfrequent, common reactions include amoreof accomplishment for having producedsensea capable machine, and/or a sense ofsuchin the face of an intelligence thathumilityours. Tasks like playing chess are insurpassesrelatively easy for a computer. But whenfactintelligence (AI) produces an imageartificialpasses for digital art, or writes versesthathumans find indistinguishable fromthatwe may wonder what are the limitspoetry,technology. Can a computer controlling ato… dance?robotquestion acquires a more serious tone inThiscontext of jobs in the future. Many of thethethat humans perform as “work” canactivitiesreplaced by machines. How can we knowbejobs are less likely to be replaced bywhichThink about which human acts may berobots?I. ScopeI. Scope(Sismondo 2009)uncomputable, and what makes them so.that keeps shifting.63
section explores what we know about theThisbetween technology and society,relationshipwhy it matters. Consider the two opposingandone, that technology drives history,perspectives:the other that society determines the typeandtechnology that exists. Which perspectiveofyou agree with, and how would youwouldHow we answer this question hasknow?for knowledge; for example, ifimplicationsdevelopment regularly outpacestechnologicaldevelopment, institutions and ethics needsocialevolve to guide this progress.toMarx, among others, held the view thatKarlwas one of the determinants oftechnologyor historical outcomes and structures, associalquote reveals: “The hand-mill gives youthiswith the feudal lord, the steam-mill,societywith the industrial capitalist.” Thissocietya form of technological determinism whichisthat technology develops according topositsown internal logic, and that as it advances ititscultural and social patterns to fit itself.mouldsdoes technological determinism look likeWhatpractice? One argument is that the politicalinthat follow technological advancementstructurestend towards a particular order. Consider,willexample, David Hayes’ view on the politicalforthat would form around widespreadstructureincreased deployment of nuclear powerThemust lead society toward authoritarianism.facilitiessafe reliance upon nuclear power as theIndeed,source of energy may be possible only in aprincipalstate … dispersed solar sources are moretotalitarianthan centralized technologies with socialcompatiblewas speculating that nuclear energyHayesmore centralized administrative powerrequiresfor instance, solar energy, which couldversus,completely decentralized. You could livebeand autonomously off the grid withcomfortablyenergy, but not with nuclear.solarget out of this dichotomy, Langdon Winner,Tohis influential 1980 essay “Do artifacts haveinproposed a middle path, the coproductionpolitics?"of technology and society, naming itpolitics”. We explore this further“technologicalsection IV.inthe development of technology, technicalInand knowledge have historically beenskillPut simply, men’s disproportionategendered.and power in the field made an impactinfluence3II. PerspectivesI I . P E R S P E C T I V E SII.1 Determinisms: On the relationshipbetween technology and societyII.2 Coded male: Identity and technologyon technology that can still be felt today. ForIn this way, it drives history.nuclear energy.equity, freedom and cultural pluralism.(Hayes 1977)Figure 3.4 Man operating a Linotype machine in the early 20thcentury64
- Page 19 and 20: II. Perspectivesto Quassim Cassam,
- Page 21 and 22: III. Methods and toolsterms: NYT Ne
- Page 23 and 24: III. Methods and toolsof it? What m
- Page 25 and 26: III. Methods and toolsIV. Ethics(b)
- Page 27 and 28: IV. Ethicsin TOK is about the explo
- Page 29 and 30: Knowledgeand politics 2is concerned
- Page 31 and 32: I. Scopehas been great concern, esp
- Page 33 and 34: I. Scopeadministrative systems, had
- Page 35 and 36: I. Scopethis book we engage with th
- Page 37 and 38: II. Perspectives“Overton window
- Page 39 and 40: II. Perspectivesopposed to scientif
- Page 41 and 42: II. Perspectivesobjective “fact o
- Page 43 and 44: II. Perspectives7 deals with public
- Page 45 and 46: II. Perspectiveshe adds, ‘It wasn
- Page 47 and 48: II. Perspectivesargued that interne
- Page 49 and 50: II. Perspectivesmedia users report
- Page 51 and 52: III. Methods and toolsLorde said yo
- Page 53 and 54: III. Methods and toolsShould we tes
- Page 55 and 56: III. Methods and toolsend of the po
- Page 57 and 58: III. Methods and toolsIV. Ethicsthe
- Page 59 and 60: IV. Ethicsoffence enters the pictur
- Page 61 and 62: IV. Ethicsenabled by technology. Pr
- Page 63 and 64: IV. Ethicsa 2018 article for the Ne
- Page 65 and 66: Knowledgeand technology 3does it me
- Page 67 and 68: I. Scopereach of human-made objects
- Page 69: I. Scopeterms:SearchSubmarineTelege
- Page 73 and 74: 3.5a shows Margaret Hamilton,Figure
- Page 75 and 76: II. Perspectivesterms: How weSearch
- Page 77 and 78: the challenges outlined in the disc
- Page 79 and 80: 2013 a team of researchers publishe
- Page 81 and 82: III. Methods and toolsAccuracy (sel
- Page 83 and 84: that object is a black hole, from w
- Page 85 and 86: IV. Ethicsand when those who stand
- Page 87 and 88: are instances in which the“[There
- Page 89 and 90: example of ethical action amongAnoc
- Page 91 and 92: IV. Ethics(using 840 billion words
- Page 93 and 94: is trained on data sets. It is this
- Page 95 and 96: I. Scopehaptr vnturs yond languags
- Page 97 and 98: I. Scopelanguags ar only on spifiHu
- Page 99 and 100: I. Scopedsriing mthods, prsptivs an
- Page 101 and 102: II. Perspectivesthat 90% will disap
- Page 103 and 104: no longr spokn, this knowldg may ar
- Page 105 and 106: II. PerspectivesEmpir and postwar A
- Page 107 and 108: II. Perspectivesin th pross. At th
- Page 109 and 110: origin of languag—how did w as hu
- Page 111 and 112: Garia Marquz appars oftn onGarillis
- Page 113 and 114: plants, insts and animals ommuniatD
- Page 115 and 116: III. Methods and toolstrms: Tahing
- Page 117 and 118: IV. Ethicsontain parls of wisdom, s
- Page 119 and 120: I. Scopesocieties have diverse idea
and pure research in science,
fundamental
through government or private
whether
grants, is in fact justified through its
sector
usefulness in the development of new
supposed
Is this belief true, though? Project
technologies.
was a 1960s study commissioned
Hindsight
the US Department of Defense to identify
by
factors that led to successful research and
the
programmes. Part of this was to
technology
the relationship between scientific
understand
and technological innovation. Project
research
was among the earliest and most
Hindsight
studies of its kind and introduced the
ambitious
of technology studies as a dedicated field of
field
distinct from science. The study found
enquiry,
scientific research contributed to only 9%
that
the key events that led to the development
of
successful technology programmes.
of
events were responsible for the
Technological
91%. What is the difference between
other
and scientific events? According
technological
this study, science was defined as theoretical
to
experimental studies of unexplained
or
while technology was defined as
phenomena,
capability to perform specific engineering
the
with known phenomena.
techniques
historians of technology it is widely accepted
Among
science owes more to the steam engine than the
that
engine owes to science … . Science is applied
steam
more than technology is applied science.
technology
Sergio Sismondo’s words, above.
Consider
what extent would you agree, and is this
To
changing over time? Why do we
relationship
to concern ourselves with making a
continue
between science and technology? A
distinction
of it has to do with questions of funding,
part
and epistemic power. We celebrate
prestige
inventors for their genius, but even one
famous
of “The Big Bang Theory” will suggest
episode
is a perceived power differential between
there
and engineers, and the kinds of
scientists
produced by each. It is an equation
knowledge
Knowledge outside the scope of
I.3
technology
advances in nanotechnology to machine
From
and neural networks, the scope of
learning
can appear relentlessly expanding.
technology
we talk about the limits of technology,
When
is often a conversation about practical
it
such as the limits of computational
limitations,
that will—the story goes—one day
power,
be overcome.
soon
a computer beats the human champion
When
the game of chess, as is becoming more and
at
frequent, common reactions include a
more
of accomplishment for having produced
sense
a capable machine, and/or a sense of
such
in the face of an intelligence that
humility
ours. Tasks like playing chess are in
surpasses
relatively easy for a computer. But when
fact
intelligence (AI) produces an image
artificial
passes for digital art, or writes verses
that
humans find indistinguishable from
that
we may wonder what are the limits
poetry,
technology. Can a computer controlling a
to
… dance?
robot
question acquires a more serious tone in
This
context of jobs in the future. Many of the
the
that humans perform as “work” can
activities
replaced by machines. How can we know
be
jobs are less likely to be replaced by
which
Think about which human acts may be
robots?
I. Scope
I. Scope
(Sismondo 2009)
uncomputable, and what makes them so.
that keeps shifting.
63