In the Middle Ages we were told what we knew by the Church; later, after the Reformation and the printing press, by state censors, then the philosophes of the Enlightenment with their Encyclopedia, then by publishers and more recently by commercial broadcast media.

In all cases it was by a small elite group of professionals.

But now with the rise of the internet, all comers are invited to post

their knowledge and express their opinions, and to rate the content of other people.

This is the new politics of knowledge. It is decidedly egalitarian.

This is where your critical thinking comes into play.

How do you evaluate the tweets and texts andvideos of people you don’t know and have never heard of?

​

​Wikipedia is not egalitarian in any admirable way if the equality of its sources results in a sloppy information architecture that gives everyone equal access to creating and receiving

mediocre information

​

knowledge is seen as facts that are more

or less simple, discrete, non-controversial, and displayed through recall

‘trivial pursuit’ model

the measure of knowledge is that it has been arrived at by a ‘reliable process’ (for example, a result obtained through rigorous scienti c procedure) or through a reliable indicator (for example, the proper use of a calculator)

reliabilism

Some terms

the ability to judge well

discernment

believing in or based on the principle that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.

​egalitarian

Some terms

states that we are all fundamentally equal in our authority or right to articulate

what should pass for knowledge

a commitment to a positionthat expertise is not necessary

dabblerism

Replace this with a header

epistemic egalitarianism

How can you comment this picture?

​

​Wikipedia`s biase

​Origin of the First Encyclopeadiae of Enlightment

​1. Do you think it is possible that there will be a perfect encyclopaedia some day? Would you know it if you saw it?

2. If there were a perfect encyclopaedia, could you get knowledge just by reading, understanding, and believing it?

3. Do you ever consider getting a second opinion on your second-hand knowledge in the way people sometimes do with medical care?

4. Do you think encyclopaedias should be free (like some on the internet) or should there be a subscription or purchase fee?