Tree of Knowledge

The Tree of association It is significant for inn to find a reliable source of companionship, as it is a powerful factor which helps family to attain success. As a good example of the significance of cognition for familiarity, the Tree of Knowledge from the Garden of Eden represents, not retributory a source of absolute knowledge, but how desperately mankind nature seeks that perfect source. However, the Tree of Knowledge does not exist in the real serviceman.Thus, parliamentary procedure is facing a problem of finding the yet ab f wholly out effective expression to produce accurate knowledge because mistaken knowledge has no value. In his act The Hive, historian and writer Marshall Poe points out two sources for knowledge social consensus and experts. In the past, it was hard to win knowledge efficiently due to equivocation, and experts were considered to be the most reliable source of knowledge. But today, the Internet has provided society with the convenient environ ment for finding and storing education.In his essay, Poe discusses the phenomenon of the web-site Wikipedia as an example of a successful effort in collaborative knowledge, which is produced during the emergence of conference and negotiation by society and experts concerning the information regarding an object of study. A professor at Harvard University and author of Reporting continue from Tomorrow, Daniel Gilbert suggests verifying on the experiences of others, whom he calls surrogates, in order to obtain to a greater extent(prenominal) reliable knowledge. Collaborative knowledge is based on societys collective experiences.It is meant to accumulate and continuously modify information from society. On the other hand, experts atomic number 18 a key for progress in society as they perform deeper re lookup rough a subject. Therefore, in order to produce reliable knowledge, society must consult with experts, musical composition experts should consider the experiences of oth er good deal when conducting their research. It might seem at the set-back sight that the only reliable source of knowledge be experts, as they micturate more than bright and prolonged experiences through practice and education in a particular field.Therefore, it is a common teaching that in order to obtain true knowledge, society has to rely on the competence of experts. In his essay, Poe says that star of the criticisms of Wikipedia in its early stage was the point that unless experts were writing and vetting the material, the articles were inevitably going to be inaccurate (Poe 275). However, human history provides evidence that refutes this statement by proving that what once was considered as absolute knowledge was later questioned.For example, in the 18th century, Isaac Newtons laws of motion became a revolution in a scientific world and for the next 200 years they remained incontestable until Albert Einstein introduced his ideas that revealed shortcomings of Newtons theory. Thus, society cannot blindly rely on the conclusions of experts because, at their core, they are like all other people who pass along their imprints in an effort to create people whose judgements think like theirs (Gilbert 171).According to Gilbert, almost any time we tell anyone anything, we are attempting to change the way their brains operate attempting to change the way they see the world so that their view of it more closely resembles our own (Gilbert 171). Experts attempt to do same thing, but their reputation in society gives their ideas an proceeds to be successfully transmitted and received as knowledge. Still, accuracy of this knowledge might be self-styled in the future. In order to understand how society decides if a certain idea or belief can become knowledge, it is important to look at the process of producing knowledge.Individuals generate personal beliefs from their own views. However, these views are based on already existing socio-cultural knowledge. Afterwards, using shared language, individuals bring their ideas and beliefs to society by fashioning public statements. Further, these beliefs may become knowledge through social interaction, communication, discussion, clarification, and negotiation. According to Gilbert, any belief that increases communication has a good chance of being transmitted over and over again (Gilbert 173). Therefore, social interaction is a medium that allows ideas to become a part of collaborative knowledge.However, in his essay, Gilbert points out that while accurate beliefs give society power, which makes it easier to understand why they are so readily transmitted from one mind to another, false beliefs have a great chance to be dustd if they happen to promote stable societies because people who hold these beliefs tend to live in stable societies, which provide the means by which false beliefs propagate (Gilbert 173). Thus, even false ideas may become knowledge if society decides so. Such decisio ns might lead to unlogical conclusions that have no value for society.According to Poe, the community decides that two summing up two equals four the same way it decides what apple is by consensus but if the community changes its mind and decides that two plus two equals five, then two plus two does equal five (Poe 275). In other words, society has an ability to make judgments of truth and falsehood, and knowledge produced by social consensus can be misleading and inaccurate. Nevertheless, inaccurate knowledge, sooner or later, go forth be revealed and questioned by society because the primary purpose of knowledge is to serve the need of society and help it to meliorate and grow.Individuals, as well as the whole society, can only attain success and progress if they have a reliable source of knowledge. It is a strong incentive that makes people search for truth. In his essay, Poe points out that people who contribute into Wikipedia have no interest other then truth in doing all this work (Poe 277). Today, the vast interconnectedness of the Internet makes it mathematical for individuals from all over the world to share their experiences and ideas on the global level.Thereby, collaborative knowledge can be constantly negotiated, updated, and renegotiated, and its quality may improve just like the quality on articles in Wikipedia generally increases with the number of eyeballs (Poe 276). As the process of producing collaborative knowledge improves its reliability, efficiency, and fertility with the new era of Internet technologies, it creates a very valuable database for experts, who can use collaborative knowledge as a resource of information and experiences collected by society for expertise.According to Gilbert, humanity is a financial support library of information about what it feels like to do just about anything (Gilbert 171). Every individual possesses a great deal of unique accumulative knowledge that he or she gained throughout life. That is why experiences of other individuals should be taken into account by experts in order to produce more accurate and documentary knowledge. Today, in the Internet environment, it has become much easier to find surrogates with particular experiences.Experts should consider these experiences during their research and constantly update their data and information based on collaborative knowledge. On the other hand, the fact that the Internet has gained so much popularity in society might make people neglect the role of experts in the process of producing knowledge. Since it has become relatively easy to find surrogates in the virtual environment and ask them directly about their experiences, collaborative knowledge might be sufficient enough to fulfill societys needs as a dependable source of knowledge. In his essay, Poe points out that given the right technology, large groups of self-interested individuals will unite to create something they could not produce by themselves (Poe 267). Wikip edia is a good example of this phenomenon. Instead of relying on experts to write articles according to their expertise, Wikipedia lets anyone write about anything (Poe 264). Based on a large number of individuals who are constantly working on improving articles and peoples tendencies to strive for truth, Wikipedia could become the end of the search for a reliable source of knowledge. However, it is important not to underestimate the role of experts in society.In his essay, Gilbert observe that, if you ask a small fry what to do when an individual is hesitating about making some decision, the child will say that he or she should ask the teacher (Gilbert 170). Throughout all human history, experts were called in for advice on their respective subject because of their extensive knowledge or ability based on research, experience, or business organisation in a particular area of study. Their knowledge and experiences are already unique, simply because experts spend more time studying the subject than an average person. It explains the fact that most innovations in human society were make by experts.Moreover, by collecting and systematizing experiences of other individuals, experts serve as surrogates for society as well. Overtime, results of their research projects accepted as knowledge become a part of social consensus. Thereby, expertise is still very important and must be taken into consideration by society as a source of knowledge. In order to be completely reliable, knowledge requires absolute certainty, as opposite to belief or cerebration about which there is more doubt. However, as a process of social communication, knowledge is never absolute.Although its quality is to be taken as final truth, knowledge remains as a subject of possible future questioning, reinterpretation, and negotiation. The Tree of Knowledge, as a source of true knowledge, is an unattainable aim for society. Neither expertise nor collaborative knowledge alone can be considered as the best way to produce knowledge. only when their collaboration can bring the most reliable results. Today, the Internet helps to speed up the processes of communication, storage, and negotiation of information that play a significant role in producing collaborative knowledge and positively affecting its quality.Thus, referring to societys collaborative experience, experts can produce more objective and reliable knowledge. Works Cited Gilbert, Daniel. Reporting Live from Tomorrow. Emerging Contemporary Readings for Writers. Ed. Barclay Barrios. Boston Bedford/St. Martins, 2010. 169-189. Print. Poe, Marshall. The Hive. Emerging Contemporary Readings for Writers. Ed. Barclay Barrios. Boston Bedford/St. Martins, 2010. 264-277. Print.