TOPIC 6: KNOWLEDGE AND TECHNOLOGY

Introduction

Technological tools, understood as cultural artefacts, does technology depend on the culture in
which it develops? What is the relationship between culture and technology?
constitute symbolic materials that not only modify the conditions of existence but also impact on
Man insofar as they produce a change in him and in his psychic understanding (Luria, 1928). Since
the making of the first stone creations, these instruments have become knowledge enhancers;
expanding the possibilities of human development, regulating the interaction with the environment
and with oneself.

The historical-cultural approach to human knowledge has shown us that the activity mediated by
these tools simultaneously modifies the environment and the subject. From this point of view,
technologies cease to be a means and become vehicles of thought. As Vigotzky (1929) points out, it
is Man who creates them, but then he sees himself transformed by them.

However, it is necessary to bear in mind that technologies do not transform social structures but are
incorporated into them. The social dimension is constitutive of scientific and technological fact. It is
society that leads the change, since every technological option is social. This forces us to raise the
debate, not only in technical terms (advantages and disadvantages of its use), but also in its
ideological, political and ethical dimension (Liguori, 1995). In other words, technological
knowledge is transversal to all cultural knowledge.

Information & knowledge

What is the difference between “data”, “information” and “knowledge?” Is there a difference
between information and knowledge? To what extent do new technologies alter the relationship
between these concepts? What role does the community of knowers play in the relationship
between these concepts?

“Information can be transmitted as it is, knowledge needs to be constructed as a

network of meaningful connections by a subject in a determined situation.” (Lion, 2006: 50)

Although they are sometimes treated as if they were the same thing, there are substantial differences
between information and knowledge. Knowledge implies internalized information, integrated into
the cognitive structures of the subject (Lion, 2006). This means that while information can be
transferred, knowledge has as a necessary condition: the involvement of a knowing subject. The
transformation of data into knowledge requires mediations not only of a cognitive nature but also of
a communicative nature. What impact has the fact that English is the primary language of the
internet had on knowledge sharing?
This involves a time that the subject must have for the search and selection of the information that
should be appropriate to be used later as raw material for knowledge.

In this sense, it is essential to have prior knowledge that gives meaning to this data. Despite that,
this does not always happen and the raw information which is used generates cognitive errors
(Burbules and Callister, 2001). On the contrary, the “critical thinkers” put credibility judgments into
place that allow them to convert the information to knowledge. How does computation help people
to process data and information to gain knowledge? What is the difference between
computational thinking, algorithmic thinking and critical thinking?

Knowledge production processes are modified when they are mediated by different kinds of
technologies. Technological tools are not only supports but become vehicles of thought, enhancers
of the knowledge that modify our way of seeing the world. New technologies make us think
differently. The globalisation of these networks has generated a profound impact on the very notion
of knowledge. How are online or virtual communities similar to / different from “traditional
communities of knowers?

Have technological developments had the greatest impact on what we know, how we know, or
how we store knowledge?

Hypertext implies new ways of organizing information and, therefore, new ways of constructing
knowledge. The possibility to choose between different pathways from of a series of interconnected
links, allows access to data in a non-linear way, giving the user the freedom to establish their own
search sequence. This leads to a theoretical and epistemological review of the processes through
which we think about reality.

Cyberspace, as a spatial categorization, allows us to unite the global with the local and regional; and
it erases the traditional division between the public and the private. What happens in a place has
repercussions in different parts of the globe almost instantaneously. This produces a clash between
the reflective nature of knowledge and brevity imposed in this era of connectivity. The technologies
quickly become obsolete, making the knowledge that is produced from them fallible and
provisional. The possibility of accessing new sources of information, previously restricted by
technical limitations, geographical distance or language limitations, allows us to be in contact with
research carried out in different parts of the world. The volume of scientific production grows
substantially and the speed of change accelerates in unthinkable ways. Knowledge ceases to be an
object-like entity that is treasured as a valuable commodity.

To what extent is the internet changing what it means to know something?

The knowledge acquired for eventual use, in the present or future, is no longer so relevant, and what
matters is how we can access it when we want to use it. Today, it is no longer necessary to
remember dates or names or places, we are one click away from accessing almost any type of
information. The old distance that existed between the question and the answer has been reduced to
just a few seconds, making "doubt" a verb which is almost obsolete.
Digital science?

It is possible that the development of new technologies has a profound implication on the
transformation of scientific paradigms. How does technology extend or transform different modes
of human cognition and communication?
As Berger (2004) describes; “we inhabit a space without horizons, without continuity between
actions, without pauses, neither past nor future. We live in an uneven and fragmented present, full
of surprises and sensations, that does not allow us to see neither results nor consequences.”
Integrated into consumerism, science is submerged in the logic of profit and becomes one more
commodity and a vital component of the productive chain. In this context of instability, innovation
becomes a valuable element within the competitive system. This has generated an exponential
increase of knowledge that implies, among other things, a specialization and division of knowledge.

Technology itself begins to be thought of as an object of analysis. How might technology

exacerbate or mitigate unequal access, and divides in our access, to knowledge? Should we hold
people responsible for the applications of technology they develop / create?
Technical support has a growing impact on work organization. Its introduction carries with it a
different way of thinking that guides the person to approach the world in a particular way. It is
necessary to analyse the technological revolution that occurred in recent decades in the framework
of a given context, in which the actors play a leading role. A tool is meaningless without a concept
or an approach. The technology is not even good or bad per se, but people are "consumers" and
"producers" of technology, who define what is done with it.

How do the tools that we use shape the knowledge that we produce?

While it is true that these tools accompany human work and justify their existence within the
framework of a community that gives them significance, the new technologies impact the central
perceptual processes of some professional fields, reconceptualizing one's own work practice. The
new forms of representation that allow new technical tools influence both the process and the
product of thought (Lion, 2006).

Using various tools, devices and applications, professionals from different branches can recreate
situations from their daily work practice, which would otherwise be very complex, expensive and in
some cases impossible to carry out. The simulated environments are a good example to think to
what extent the use of the new tools modify the forms of research and experimentation. Examples:

• Simulate the application of drugs to an anaesthetized animal

• Simulate complex surgical operations
• Intelligent robots (like the SIMMAN 3G), which are capable of reproducing reactions such as
pain and responding with breathing sounds, blinking, and vomiting to medical interventions.
• Simulations of entire factories. The Omniverse. The parallel universe that will save
thousands of millions to the world economy.

These new tools allow us to represent situations that are difficult to access, dangerous and ethically
questionable. The possibility of emulating heart attacks, haemorrhages or schedule emergency
simulations where the patient may lose their life, allows not only the reduction of the number of
accidents, but also improve procedures until we can perform them as accurately as possible.

How are online or virtual communities similar to / different from “traditional communities of
knowers?
In this huge network in which we move without knowing where we are going, human relationships
are mediated by different teleinformation devices generating new forms of communication that in
turn create new systems of signs. It is impossible to understand the way we look at and understand
the world without analysing the media through which we do it. As we pointed out at the beginning,
technologies allow us to interact with the environment, transforming it and transforming ourselves.
They are creation and creators of a reality that we inhabit and that inhabits us, what we think and
what makes us think and what it changes as we go.

Text extracted from: Information and knowledge in a digital era