The History of Knowledge and the Future of Knowledge Societies

The new field of the history of knowledge is often presented as a mere expansion of the history of science. We argue that it has a greater ambition. The re‐definition of the historiographical domain of the history of knowledge urges us to ask new questions about the boundaries, hierarchies, and mutual constitution of different types of knowledge as well as the role and assessment of failure and ignorance in making knowledge. These issues have pertinence in the current climate where expertise is increasingly questioned and authority seems to lose its ground. Illustrated with examples from recent historiography of the sixteenth to twentieth centuries, we indicate some fruitful new avenues for research in the history of knowledge. Taken together, we hope that they will show that the history of knowledge could build the expertise required by the challenges of twenty‐first century knowledge societies, just like the history of science, throughout its development as a discipline in the twentieth century, responded to the demands posed by science and society.     

Knowledge That Matters: Identifying Regional Knowledge Assets of the Tampere Region

The existing literature considers knowledge as one of the key drivers of regional development. The idiosyncratic nature of regional knowledge is also acknowledged: each region possesses its unique knowledge assets which serve as the basis of value creation. However, what is currently not well-known is how the region-specific knowledge assets can be identified, for example, in order to manage and develop them. Thus this paper aims first to explore how the relevant knowledge assets can be identified for a given region, and, second, to describe what the context-specific knowledge assets are. These objectives are pursued using a qualitative case approach. As a case region, this study focuses on the Tampere Region in Finland. The study makes a contribution by providing a new insight regarding the contextual identification of regional knowledge assets and by illustrating the key knowledge assets of the case region. These insights are considered valuable for the regional actors responsible for carrying out similar initiatives in their respective regions.     

Tibetan Knowledge Comptition

ＴｉｂｅｔａｎＫｎｏｗｌｅｄｇｅＣｏｍｐｔｉｔｉｏｎ￥ＰｈｏｔｏｂｙＧａｏＧｕｏｒｏｎｇＴｈｅＫｎｏｗｌｅｄｇｅＣｏｍｐｅｔｉｔｉｏｎｏｎＣｈｉｎａ＇ｓＴｉｂｅｔ,ｓｐｏｎｓｏｒｅｄｂｙｔｈｅＣｈｉｎａＲａｄｉｏＩｎｔｅｒｎａｔｉｏｎａｌ（ＣＲＩ）ａ...     

Knowledge and society

Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann: The Social Construction of Reality, Allan Lane, The Penguin Press, London, 1967, 249 pp. S8.50. Also (1967) as Anchor Paperback $1.25.     

Knowledge and Proximity

Over the years knowledge has come to be seen as crucial for economic progress, and proximity as conducive to knowledge exchange. As a result, knowledge-related processes are often considered as possible explanation of the spatial agglomeration of economic activities. However, knowledge and proximity are general concepts that have to be detailed before it is possible to specify the concrete mechanisms at work. Building on recent work that focuses on proximity, this paper develops a perspective in which proximity features as an enabling element, but no more than that, in ongoing processes of knowledge creation, transfer, absorption, and change. We argue that knowledge is to be viewed as activity and process, rather than object or commodity. Concentrating on “knowledge agents”—those engaged in knowledge-related processes, individuals and collectives—will be more productive than persisting to rely on the distinction between tacit and codified knowledge to explain spatial aspects of the economy. Finally, we argue that regions are different when it comes to the extent, and the way, they facilitate creation, transfer, and other knowledge processes. Contributions to local or regional economic development, whether through research or policy, have to take existing repertoires—patterns in collective knowledge—into account.     

The Idea of Indigenous Knowledge

The idea of ‘indigenous knowledge’ is a relatively recent phenomenon that, amongst other things, constitutes part of a challenge to ‘western’ thinking and conceptualization. Advocates of indigenous knowledge maintain that its study has profound educational and ethical relevance and also emphasise its significance in antiracist, antisexist and postcolonialist discourse, in general, and in terms of the ‘African Renaissance’, in particular. This paper argues the following: (1) ‘indigenous knowledge’ involves at best an incomplete, partial or, at worst, a questionable understanding or conception of knowledge; (2) as a tool in anti-discrimination and anti-repression discourse, ‘indigenous knowledge’ is largely inappropriate. I show, further, that in the development of ‘knowledge’, following some necessary conceptual readjustments in our understanding of this term, there is considerably greater common ground than admitted by theorists. It is this acknowledgement, not adherence to a popular concept of debatable plausibility that has profound educational, ethical and political consequences.     

Knowledge is our Destiny

Abstract

Tracing the development of the human spirit from empiricism to science, the desire to know more about science is discussed and considered to be due to two main springs, curiosity and practical utility. This has led directly to two revolutions, the Industrial Revolution and the Information Revolution. Next, the interaction of science, engineering and technology is proclaimed and 'the virtuous circle' drawn to illustrate this interaction, linked to the funding of its three components. As knowledge is power, those who possess it, the scientists and technologists, have the duty to make the societies in which they live more aware of the powers and limitations of science.     

知识维度的博物馆学结构

博物馆学结构是指博物馆学分支学科的区分、内容、周界和相互关系.传统博物馆学体系多将博物馆实践与博物馆知识区别开,强调博物馆学理论的科学性,存在着理论与实践脱节、行业封闭、缺少包容和对话等问题.博物馆学是有关博物馆的知识的集大成,是人们对作为社会存在的博物馆的知识的集合和批判,可以从知识的维度对博物馆学研究成果进行梳理整合,将知识创新作为推动博物馆学研究的动力,在此基础上建构知识维度的博物馆学结构,即包涵博物馆志、理性博物馆学、元博物馆学三个子系统的博物馆学体系.     

Limits of Historical and Scientific Knowledge

The purpose of this paper is to suggest that subtle and essential uncertainties in language determine the limits of science and history, and thereby define the boundaries of research in the history of science. Historical research, in the strict sense of history as opposed to prehistory, begins with the examination of written records. There is a host of problems in the interpretation of the historical record, but underlying all of these is the simply stated yet complex question of the meaning of words in historical documents. Since this is where the practice of history begins, this problem delimits the boundaries of historical knowledge. In this paper, I will examine structural ambiguities in the meaning of words, explain how they arise, and provide independent evidence for the validity of the analysis.     

The Authenticity of Spatial Planning Knowledge

This article intends to start a debate on the authentic disciplinary grounds of spatial planning studies as a scientific discipline of spatial intervention closely interrelated with practices of spatial development. In a volatile epoch of regrouping academic specializations, scientists feel a strong incentive to reflect on the authentic grounds of their discipline. This certainly goes for spatial planning studies that heavily rely on intensive interaction with a wide range of disciplines. What justifies its own position? Spatial planning studies are intensely interrelated with practices of planning, which demarcates its scientific position in a specific way. The author does not claim an exclusive position for spatial planning studies (the diversity of external relations and alliances enriches the field of study) but defines the authentic identity of the spatial planning discipline in the conceptual coherence of five dimensions: practical context, spatial norms, knowledge and action, to be validated in new contexts of practice. The author states that different planning paradigms interconnect the five dimensions in their own way and in doing so innovate the authentic body of planning knowledge. To invest in this authenticity is crucial in this era of organizational proliferation.     

Knowledge Externalities and Knowledge Spillovers in Social Networks: The Case of Izmir Metalwork Industrial District

Social networks are the networks based on relationships between social entities. Since social interactions are directly associated with externalities, these relationships are assumed to create opportunities for the network members by providing especially knowledge flows. In this context, the main objective of this study is to show the role of knowledge externalities in social networks. By following this aim, some theoretical derivations are delivered and survey results in a small-world network are explained. Consequently, after a brief introduction, the first section of this study consists of a theoretical model derived by including knowledge externalities in social networks. In the second section, a survey applied in Izmir Metalwork Industrial District is explained. Finally, in the third section, survey results are presented and then conclusions and discussions for further research are revealed. Contributions of this study to the related literature are three-fold. Firstly, knowledge externalities are added to the models of knowledge flows in social networks explicitly. Secondly, a questionnaire trying to measure knowledge spillovers and knowledge externalities separately is introduced and applied for the first time in the literature. Finally, such an analysis is the first for Izmir which is the third metropolitan city of Turkey.