Power-knowledge: Difference between revisions
→Definition: information is separate from the definition |
lead should summarize topic, adding information from body, see WP:LEAD |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ⚫ | In [[sociology]], '''power-knowledge''' is a term introduced by the French [[philosopher]] [[Michel Foucault]] ({{lang-fr|le savoir-pouvoir}}). According to Foucault's understanding, power is based on knowledge and makes use of knowledge; on the other hand, power reproduces knowledge by shaping it in accordance with its anonymous intentions.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The history of sexuality.|last=Foucault, Michel, 1926-1984.|date=2008|publisher=Penguin|isbn=9780141037646|oclc=709809777}}</ref> Power (re-) creates its own fields of exercise through knowledge. |
||
| ⚫ | The relationship between power and knowledge has been always a central theme in the social sciences.<ref name="volume-control">{{Cite journal|last=Segev|first=Elad|date=2019-09-05|title=Volume and control: the transition from information to power|journal=Journal of Multicultural Discourses|volume=14|issue=3|pages=240–257|doi=10.1080/17447143.2019.1662028|issn=1744-7143}}</ref> From a [[political economy]] perspective, [[Harold Innis]] extensively wrote on the "[[monopoly of knowledge]]",<ref>{{Cite book|title=Empire and communications|last=Innis, Harold A., 1894-1952.|date=2007|publisher=Dundurn Press|others=Watson, A. John (Alexander John), 1948-|isbn=9781550026627|location=Toronto [Ont.]|oclc=605708272}}</ref> in which [[empire]]s over the history exploited information and communication resources to produce exclusive knowledge and power. |
||
| ⚫ | The relationship between power and knowledge has been always a central theme in the social sciences.<ref name="volume-control">{{Cite journal|last=Segev|first=Elad|date=2019-09-05|title=Volume and control: the transition from information to power|journal=Journal of Multicultural Discourses|volume=14|issue=3|pages=240–257|doi=10.1080/17447143.2019.1662028|issn=1744-7143}}</ref> From a [[political economy]] perspective, [[Harold Innis]] extensively wrote on the "[[monopoly of knowledge]]",<ref>{{Cite book|title=Empire and communications|last=Innis, Harold A., 1894-1952.|date=2007|publisher=Dundurn Press|others=Watson, A. John (Alexander John), 1948-|isbn=9781550026627|location=Toronto [Ont.]|oclc=605708272}}</ref> in which [[empire]]s over the history exploited information and communication resources to produce exclusive knowledge and power. |
||
== Definition == |
|||
| ⚫ | According to Foucault's understanding |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | It is helpful noting that Foucault has a textual understanding of both power and knowledge. Both power and knowledge are to be seen as de-centralised, relativistic, ubiquitous, and unstable (dynamic) systemic phenomena. Thus Foucault's concept of power draws on micro-relations without falling into [[reductionism]] because it does not neglect, but emphasizes, the systemic (or structural) aspect of the phenomenon. However, he does not actually define knowledge. |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | In [[information science]]s 'knowledge' is defined as a higher form of information,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Bates|first=Marcia|date=2005|title=Information and knowledge: an evolutionary framework for information science|url=http://www.informationr.net/ir/10-4/paper239.html|journal=Information Research|volume=10|pages=|via=}}</ref> which requires understanding the patterns and creating useful meaning of the information people collect. |
||
== History of the term == |
== History of the term == |
||
In his 1934 play ‘[[The Rock (play)|The Rock]]’ [[T. S. Eliot]] wrote: ‘Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?’.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Choruses from 'The Rock'|last=Eliot|first=Thomas Stearns|publisher=Harcourt, Brace & Company|year=1952|isbn=978-0-57-121385-6|location=New York|pages=96}}</ref> This division between information, knowledge and wisdom inspired many generation of information scientists later on.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Rowley|first=Jennifer|date=April 2007|title=The wisdom hierarchy: representations of the DIKW hierarchy|journal=Journal of Information Science|volume=33|issue=2|pages=163–180|doi=10.1177/0165551506070706|issn=0165-5515|url=https://www.mir-nayka.com/jour/article/view/838}}</ref> |
In his 1934 play ‘[[The Rock (play)|The Rock]]’ [[T. S. Eliot]] wrote: ‘Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?’.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Choruses from 'The Rock'|last=Eliot|first=Thomas Stearns|publisher=Harcourt, Brace & Company|year=1952|isbn=978-0-57-121385-6|location=New York|pages=96}}</ref> This division between information, knowledge and wisdom inspired many generation of information scientists later on.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Rowley|first=Jennifer|date=April 2007|title=The wisdom hierarchy: representations of the DIKW hierarchy|journal=Journal of Information Science|volume=33|issue=2|pages=163–180|doi=10.1177/0165551506070706|issn=0165-5515|url=https://www.mir-nayka.com/jour/article/view/838}}</ref> |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | It is helpful noting that Foucault has a textual understanding of both power and knowledge. Both power and knowledge are to be seen as de-centralised, relativistic, ubiquitous, and unstable (dynamic) systemic phenomena. Thus Foucault's concept of power draws on micro-relations without falling into [[reductionism]] because it does not neglect, but emphasizes, the systemic (or structural) aspect of the phenomenon. However, he does not actually define knowledge. |
||
In his later works, [[Michel Foucault|Foucault]] suggests that power-knowledge was later replaced in the modern world, with the term [[governmentality]] which points to a specific mentality of governance. |
In his later works, [[Michel Foucault|Foucault]] suggests that power-knowledge was later replaced in the modern world, with the term [[governmentality]] which points to a specific mentality of governance. |
||
| Line 22: | Line 18: | ||
According to this understanding, knowledge is never neutral, as it determines force relations. The notion of power-knowledge is therefore likely to be employed in critical, normative contexts. One example of the implications of power-knowledge is [[Google|Google’s]] monopoly of knowledge, its [[PageRank]] algorithm, and its inevitable commercial and cultural biases around the world, which are based on the volume and control principles. A recent study shows, for example, the commercial implications of [[Google Images]] algorithm, as all search results for the term 'beauty' in different languages predominantly yield images of white young females.<ref name="volume-control" /> |
According to this understanding, knowledge is never neutral, as it determines force relations. The notion of power-knowledge is therefore likely to be employed in critical, normative contexts. One example of the implications of power-knowledge is [[Google|Google’s]] monopoly of knowledge, its [[PageRank]] algorithm, and its inevitable commercial and cultural biases around the world, which are based on the volume and control principles. A recent study shows, for example, the commercial implications of [[Google Images]] algorithm, as all search results for the term 'beauty' in different languages predominantly yield images of white young females.<ref name="volume-control" /> |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | In [[information science]]s 'knowledge' is defined as a higher form of information,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Bates|first=Marcia|date=2005|title=Information and knowledge: an evolutionary framework for information science|url=http://www.informationr.net/ir/10-4/paper239.html|journal=Information Research|volume=10|pages=|via=}}</ref> which requires understanding the patterns and creating useful meaning of the information people collect. |
||
== References == |
== References == |
||
Revision as of 00:13, 8 May 2020
In sociology, power-knowledge is a term introduced by the French philosopher Michel Foucault (Template:Lang-fr). According to Foucault's understanding, power is based on knowledge and makes use of knowledge; on the other hand, power reproduces knowledge by shaping it in accordance with its anonymous intentions.[1] Power (re-) creates its own fields of exercise through knowledge.
The relationship between power and knowledge has been always a central theme in the social sciences.[2] From a political economy perspective, Harold Innis extensively wrote on the "monopoly of knowledge",[3] in which empires over the history exploited information and communication resources to produce exclusive knowledge and power.
History of the term
In his 1934 play ‘The Rock’ T. S. Eliot wrote: ‘Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?’.[4] This division between information, knowledge and wisdom inspired many generation of information scientists later on.[5]
Foucault incorporates mutuality into his neologism power-knowledge, the most important part of which is the hyphen that links the two aspects of the integrated concept together (and alludes to their inherent inextricability).
It is helpful noting that Foucault has a textual understanding of both power and knowledge. Both power and knowledge are to be seen as de-centralised, relativistic, ubiquitous, and unstable (dynamic) systemic phenomena. Thus Foucault's concept of power draws on micro-relations without falling into reductionism because it does not neglect, but emphasizes, the systemic (or structural) aspect of the phenomenon. However, he does not actually define knowledge.
In his later works, Foucault suggests that power-knowledge was later replaced in the modern world, with the term governmentality which points to a specific mentality of governance.
Modern developments
While in most of the 20th century the term ‘knowledge’ has been closely associated with power, in the last decades ‘information’ has become a central term as well.[6] With the growing use of big-data, information is increasingly seen as the means to generate useful knowledge and power.
One of the recently developed model, known as the Volume and Control Model,[2] describes how information is capitalized by global corporations and transforms into economic power. Volume is defined as the informational resources—the amount and diversity of information and the people producing it. Control is the ability to channel the interaction between information and people through two competing mechanisms: popularization (information relevant to most people), and personalization (information relevant to each individual person).
According to this understanding, knowledge is never neutral, as it determines force relations. The notion of power-knowledge is therefore likely to be employed in critical, normative contexts. One example of the implications of power-knowledge is Google’s monopoly of knowledge, its PageRank algorithm, and its inevitable commercial and cultural biases around the world, which are based on the volume and control principles. A recent study shows, for example, the commercial implications of Google Images algorithm, as all search results for the term 'beauty' in different languages predominantly yield images of white young females.[2]
Connection to Information
In information sciences 'knowledge' is defined as a higher form of information,[7] which requires understanding the patterns and creating useful meaning of the information people collect.
References
- ^ Foucault, Michel, 1926-1984. (2008). The history of sexuality. Penguin. ISBN 9780141037646. OCLC 709809777.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) - ^ a b c Segev, Elad (2019-09-05). "Volume and control: the transition from information to power". Journal of Multicultural Discourses. 14 (3): 240–257. doi:10.1080/17447143.2019.1662028. ISSN 1744-7143.
- ^ Innis, Harold A., 1894-1952. (2007). Empire and communications. Watson, A. John (Alexander John), 1948-. Toronto [Ont.]: Dundurn Press. ISBN 9781550026627. OCLC 605708272.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) - ^ Eliot, Thomas Stearns (1952). Choruses from 'The Rock'. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company. p. 96. ISBN 978-0-57-121385-6.
- ^ Rowley, Jennifer (April 2007). "The wisdom hierarchy: representations of the DIKW hierarchy". Journal of Information Science. 33 (2): 163–180. doi:10.1177/0165551506070706. ISSN 0165-5515.
- ^ Lash, Scott. (2002). Critique of information. London: SAGE. ISBN 9781847876522. OCLC 654641948.
- ^ Bates, Marcia (2005). "Information and knowledge: an evolutionary framework for information science". Information Research. 10.