KIO SUMMARY
HC1
- 24 multiple choice questions
- 1 open question
Automation/industrial society (Fordisme) To digitization (Post-Fordisme/post-industrial society)
To datafication/digitalization
DEVELOPMENT OF KNOWLEDGE (voor het beeld)
80’s/90’s: Knowledge = competitive advantage, explicit knowledge, digital storage
2000: Knowledge = experiential, captured in doing, tacit knowledge, communities (CoP)
2010: Power, tool and object in conflicts
2020: Never-ending cycle of knowing and correcting, disciplinary power of knowledge
Further away: Collective knowledge, created by ICT big data, decision-support systems
Epistemology = philosophy addressing the nature of knowledge. ‘Knowledge about knowledge’. How
do we define what is true? What is regarded as valid knowledge and why?
EPISTEMOLOGY DIMENSION:
Dualism (objectivist, either/or) [what is knowledge?] = knowledge can be codified &
separated from people who possess it
- Either/or -> e.g. water boils at 100 degrees (if it’s not boiling, then it’s not 100 degrees or it
isn’t water)
Duality (practice-based, both/and) [when is knowledge?] = knowledge is embedded in,
developed through and inseparable from people’s workplace. Knowledge is in the doing. it
can be in our heads but if we don’t use it, there’s no knowledge. Knowledge situated in a
context, can be something else within the next hour
- Both/and -> e.g. people with different opinions, but still both got valid information
SOCIAL ORDER DIMENSION:
Consensus (sociology of regulation) [glass half full] = existing social relations are
unproblematic and challenging them isn’t considered
- Trust – common interest – science/knowledge is neutral
Dissensus (sociology of radical change/conflict) [glass half empty] = social relations are
problematic and reinforce power differentials
- Suspicion – conflict of interest – science/knowledge is political
, EPISTEMOLOGY
SOCIAL ORDER Practice-based (duality) Objectivist (dualism)
Dissensus Dialogical discourse Critical discourse (knowledge
(knowledge = discipline) = power)
Consensus Constructivist discourse Neo-functionalist discourse
(knowledge = mind) (knowledge = asset)
*Discourse = perspective
Knowledge = asset -> objective, measurable, it can be acquired
Knowledge = mind -> socially constructed, in the doing (practice), shared context, generation of
understanding (‘collective minds’ -> there is a common thought when you work together a lot)
Knowledge = power -> role of knowledge in organizational underclass: reformation of social order,
domination and emancipation (e.g. Marxism, labour process)
Knowledge = discipline -> deconstruction of totalizing knowledge claims, creation of multiple
knowledges, never-ending process of knowing and correcting (the self) (e.g. ‘10.000 steps is healthy’
rule is normalized, but is it actually healthy?)
Neo-functionalism (most dominant) = regional integration which downplays globalisation,
reintroduces territory into its governance
- other word for Neo-functionalism = objectivist
Social constructivism = collaborative nature of learning, knowledge develops from how people
interact with each other
Explicit knowledge (e.g. data, spreadsheet) Tacit knowledge (e.g.
biking)
Objectivist perspective - subjective intuition
Expressed in language and shared through data
Objective - subjective
Impersonal - personal
Context-independent - context-dependent
Easy to share
Codifiable - difficult to codify
3 TYPES OF COLLECTIVE KNOWLEDGE
Shared = knowledge held by individuals in a group
Complementary = knowledge regarding the division of expertise in a group
Artifactual = knowledge embedded in collective group artifacts
HC1
- 24 multiple choice questions
- 1 open question
Automation/industrial society (Fordisme) To digitization (Post-Fordisme/post-industrial society)
To datafication/digitalization
DEVELOPMENT OF KNOWLEDGE (voor het beeld)
80’s/90’s: Knowledge = competitive advantage, explicit knowledge, digital storage
2000: Knowledge = experiential, captured in doing, tacit knowledge, communities (CoP)
2010: Power, tool and object in conflicts
2020: Never-ending cycle of knowing and correcting, disciplinary power of knowledge
Further away: Collective knowledge, created by ICT big data, decision-support systems
Epistemology = philosophy addressing the nature of knowledge. ‘Knowledge about knowledge’. How
do we define what is true? What is regarded as valid knowledge and why?
EPISTEMOLOGY DIMENSION:
Dualism (objectivist, either/or) [what is knowledge?] = knowledge can be codified &
separated from people who possess it
- Either/or -> e.g. water boils at 100 degrees (if it’s not boiling, then it’s not 100 degrees or it
isn’t water)
Duality (practice-based, both/and) [when is knowledge?] = knowledge is embedded in,
developed through and inseparable from people’s workplace. Knowledge is in the doing. it
can be in our heads but if we don’t use it, there’s no knowledge. Knowledge situated in a
context, can be something else within the next hour
- Both/and -> e.g. people with different opinions, but still both got valid information
SOCIAL ORDER DIMENSION:
Consensus (sociology of regulation) [glass half full] = existing social relations are
unproblematic and challenging them isn’t considered
- Trust – common interest – science/knowledge is neutral
Dissensus (sociology of radical change/conflict) [glass half empty] = social relations are
problematic and reinforce power differentials
- Suspicion – conflict of interest – science/knowledge is political
, EPISTEMOLOGY
SOCIAL ORDER Practice-based (duality) Objectivist (dualism)
Dissensus Dialogical discourse Critical discourse (knowledge
(knowledge = discipline) = power)
Consensus Constructivist discourse Neo-functionalist discourse
(knowledge = mind) (knowledge = asset)
*Discourse = perspective
Knowledge = asset -> objective, measurable, it can be acquired
Knowledge = mind -> socially constructed, in the doing (practice), shared context, generation of
understanding (‘collective minds’ -> there is a common thought when you work together a lot)
Knowledge = power -> role of knowledge in organizational underclass: reformation of social order,
domination and emancipation (e.g. Marxism, labour process)
Knowledge = discipline -> deconstruction of totalizing knowledge claims, creation of multiple
knowledges, never-ending process of knowing and correcting (the self) (e.g. ‘10.000 steps is healthy’
rule is normalized, but is it actually healthy?)
Neo-functionalism (most dominant) = regional integration which downplays globalisation,
reintroduces territory into its governance
- other word for Neo-functionalism = objectivist
Social constructivism = collaborative nature of learning, knowledge develops from how people
interact with each other
Explicit knowledge (e.g. data, spreadsheet) Tacit knowledge (e.g.
biking)
Objectivist perspective - subjective intuition
Expressed in language and shared through data
Objective - subjective
Impersonal - personal
Context-independent - context-dependent
Easy to share
Codifiable - difficult to codify
3 TYPES OF COLLECTIVE KNOWLEDGE
Shared = knowledge held by individuals in a group
Complementary = knowledge regarding the division of expertise in a group
Artifactual = knowledge embedded in collective group artifacts
