Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang
is a case study in the collectiveWikipediaof multiple perspectives, enablednegotiationtechnology, towards crafting a sharedbyof fact. It can be a step towardsunderstandingdemocratic participation in the productionmoreknowledge, assuming, that is, that we acceptofis on Wikipedia as knowledge. Yes, itwhatcrowd-sourced, but as far as crowds go,isis exceedingly well-organized, whichWikipediahave good or bad results.mayis hardly news to anyone in the 2020sItthere are concerns with knowledge onthatterms: Truth inSearchEverythingNumbers:2010 documentary Truth in Numbers:TheAccording to Wikipedia raisesEverythingquestions about knowledge in theimportantage. Below we provide some promptsdigitalexploring the profound ways that thisforhas affected how we produce andtechnologyknowledge. The documentary providesaccessof the context for these discussions, butmuchis a decade old—so consider the followingitand questions with any recent sourcespointsPower and authority: Wikipedia's model of•participation questions the powercollectiveacademic credentials. This is not to sayofpower plays no role on Wikipedia, butthatit does not sit with an intellectual elite.thatdocumentary reveals a deep suspicionTheauthority and derision of elitism amongofcontributors. Experts are givenWikipediaspecial role in contributing to contentnoare no longer seen as legitimateandand arbiters of what counts asgatekeepersTheirs is just another opinion,knowledge.of Wikipedia and criticizing it for itsreliabilityand racial bias is old news. Yet manygenderremain unresolved, perhaps even widelyissueseven though Wikipedia is one ofunknown,primary reference sources for many peoplethethe world. Despite the problematicaroundof how Wikipedia is set up, peoplepoliticsto organize “editing marathons” to addcontinueor develop the entries of underrepresentedtoor topics. They are confronted with thepeoplethat Wikipedia might be the best theypossibilitydo at this scale, and it is up to them to makecanto be welcomed? What may besomethingconsequences of this?potentialNeutrality and trust: content on•is presented by its creators asWikipediasourced, coming from nodemocraticallypoint of view. Do you agreeparticularthis claim that Wikipedia is neutralwithview from nowhere”)? Wikipedia’s(“asourcing of content meanscollectivewe are not able to evaluate claimsthaton who the claims-makers are. RecallbasedCarr's advice to history students fromE.H.9: “study the historian before youChapter[their] facts”. How are legitimacystudyAccountability and credibility: because•contributors use pseudonyms,Wikipediacannot be held personallycontributorsfor what they write or delete.accountabledoes this affect the credibility ofHowon Wikipedia? Are the risksknowledgeWikipedia vandalism or misconductofby the benefits of pseudonymityoutweighedIs it knowledge? Is it appropriate to•what Wikipedia contributors aredescribeas producing knowledge? Woulddoingdescribe what is on Wikipedia asyouIII. Methods and toolsIII. Methods and toolsit good enough.Wikipedia. In some ways, questioning theFor discussionEverything, according to WikipediaAccording to Wikipediaand trust built on Wikipedia?that explore the same issues.for intellectual freedom and privacy?knowledge?with no special power or authority. Is this69
the challenges outlined in the discussionBeyondthere are outstanding issues withabove,The same entry in another languageWikipedia.have different or even contradictorymayWikipedia favours published sources,content.tends to exclude Oral Traditions and non-whichforms of knowledge. Wikipedia itselfwrittenlooked into the possibility of oral footnoteshasentries, in the project People are Knowledge,onhere.linkedterms: WikimediaSearchoral citationsresearchWikipedia inspire confidence that, inDoesdigital culture that is often divisive andawe can arrive at a consensus aboutinflammatory,Do technologies such as the wikiknowledge?make the process of how we come toplatformthings more inclusive andjust?knowPreserving, sharing and universalIII.2to knowledgeaccesscontributions to the digitalDemocratizingbase of humanity is one issue, butknowledgeaccess to it presents an altogetherincreasingchallenge. The impulse to gatherdifferentpreserve knowledge is not new; librariesandperformed this function for millenia.haveis thedigital age changing what thisHowlike—what are the new challengeslooksopportunitiesin how we preserve andandaccessknowledge?1996 Brewster Kahle has been leading anSinceto preserve all digital knowledge. Hiseffortthe Internet Archive, saves a copy ofproject,page on public websites. It has collectedeveryof billions of copies of online content.hundredsyou have ever used the Wayback MachineIfaccess past versions of websites, you maytorecognize the value of such a project.alreadyallows access to the internet as it was in theItwhich is important where hyperlinkspast,content is revised and pages areexpire,deletedroutinely.9 asks what remains of the past and howChapteraccess it. Consider how technologicalhistorianssuch as the Wayback Machine,developments,how much of the past becomes available.changemight the methods used to produce knowledgeHowhistory change as a result?inyou are interested in further exploring the role ofIfin knowing the past and imagining thetechnologylook at the work of historian Abby Smith Rumsey.future,talk delivered to technologists at Google—linkedHerhow we preserve and share knowledgebelow—tacklestime, and how technology is changing this.acrossterms: SmithSearchYouTube WhenRumseykeeps an extensive list of book-burningWikipediain history, a small number of which areincidents3III. Methods and toolsMaking connectionsHistory and digital traces of the pastwe are no moreaccidents, with the rest being attempts to control70
- 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 and 70: I. Scopeterms:SearchSubmarineTelege
- Page 71 and 72: section explores what we know about
- Page 73 and 74: 3.5a shows Margaret Hamilton,Figure
- Page 75: II. Perspectivesterms: How weSearch
- 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
- Page 121 and 122: only since 2019, their claims to be
- Page 123 and 124: I. ScopeII. Perspectivesthe contour
- Page 125 and 126: became clear only decadespreservati
the challenges outlined in the discussion
Beyond
there are outstanding issues with
above,
The same entry in another language
Wikipedia.
have different or even contradictory
may
Wikipedia favours published sources,
content.
tends to exclude Oral Traditions and non-
which
forms of knowledge. Wikipedia itself
written
looked into the possibility of oral footnotes
has
entries, in the project People are Knowledge,
on
here.
linked
terms: Wikimedia
Search
oral citations
research
Wikipedia inspire confidence that, in
Does
digital culture that is often divisive and
a
we can arrive at a consensus about
inflammatory,
Do technologies such as the wiki
knowledge?
make the process of how we come to
platform
things more inclusive andjust?
know
Preserving, sharing and universal
III.2
to knowledge
access
contributions to the digital
Democratizing
base of humanity is one issue, but
knowledge
access to it presents an altogether
increasing
challenge. The impulse to gather
different
preserve knowledge is not new; libraries
and
performed this function for millenia.
have
is thedigital age changing what this
How
like—what are the new challenges
looks
opportunitiesin how we preserve and
and
accessknowledge?
1996 Brewster Kahle has been leading an
Since
to preserve all digital knowledge. His
effort
the Internet Archive, saves a copy of
project,
page on public websites. It has collected
every
of billions of copies of online content.
hundreds
you have ever used the Wayback Machine
If
access past versions of websites, you may
to
recognize the value of such a project.
already
allows access to the internet as it was in the
It
which is important where hyperlinks
past,
content is revised and pages are
expire,
deletedroutinely.
9 asks what remains of the past and how
Chapter
access it. Consider how technological
historians
such as the Wayback Machine,
developments,
how much of the past becomes available.
change
might the methods used to produce knowledge
How
history change as a result?
in
you are interested in further exploring the role of
If
in knowing the past and imagining the
technology
look at the work of historian Abby Smith Rumsey.
future,
talk delivered to technologists at Google—linked
Her
how we preserve and share knowledge
below—tackles
time, and how technology is changing this.
across
terms: Smith
Search
YouTube When
Rumsey
keeps an extensive list of book-burning
Wikipedia
in history, a small number of which are
incidents
3III. Methods and tools
Making connections
History and digital traces of the past
we are no more
accidents, with the rest being attempts to control
70
Change language