Culture - Intertwingled: Information Changes Everything - page 84

tioned, consequential, even “official,” and are accepted as grounds for legitimate inference and ac-
tion…The legitimation of one way of knowing as authoritative devalues, often totally dismisses, all other
ways of knowing…The constitution of authoritative knowledge is an ongoing social process that both
builds and reflects power relationships within a community of practice…The power of authoritative
knowledge is not that it is correct but that it counts.
To be fair, we may rely on hierarchical decision-making for good reason, but authoritative
knowledge is driven by both efficacy and power. So it's naïve to inquire which way is better.
Better for whom? Better in which contexts? Better for what purposes? These are the questions we
must ask.
Not so long ago, our ways of knowing were different. Before the printing press, we relied heav-
ily upon personal experience and our senses, using evidence and induction to find the truth. In
time, we extended our senses with instruments and formalized trial-and-error as the scientific
method. We added to our empirical ways with deduction, using reason and logic to mathematic-
ally prove the truth. To absorb second-hand knowledge, we had to do it in person. Cultural wis-
dom was embodied in rituals, habits, laws, and myths. Power, authority, and trust were
centered in the community.
Today most knowledge is second-hand, and we don't even know where it comes from. Access to
massive amounts of conflicting information from myriad sources creates filter failure. We don't
know what to believe. So we fall back on simple ways of knowing. We trust experts and those in
authority. We follow doctor's orders. Or we reject expertise completely. Like U.S. senator James
Inhofe, we know global warming is a hoax, because it's cold outside. Of course, we're not forced
to a single extreme. We may allow for many inputs, and then use intuition to feel our way to the
truth.