TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- The Politics of Knowledge

The Politics of Knowledge

Who invented the aeroplane?

No matter how simple this question may be, my answer (and that of most Brazilians) would differ from what Americans might expect. When I first heard about the Wright Brothers being the inventors (in an American cartoon), I was shocked - "What the hell happened to Santos-Dumont?". He was the name behind two pioneering flights, yet it seemed like his existence was ignored in North America. But that would be oversimplifying, not to mention the problems of empty speculations in general.

Later, I found out there was a similar controversy regarding the invention of the telephone. Could it be the case? It would be easy to claim Santos-Dumont was a victim: not only he came from a country that had a poor scientific background, he was black and gay in a somewhat less tolerant era.

I'm not bringing up the "white male science" myth, but it begs the question: Why aren't there many famous Asian scholars, in spite of the high levels of education in the Far East? Is there any popular Latin American intellectual? How many of us know anything at all about African thought? Had Chomsky's family remained in Ukraine, would he still be famous?

My point being: how much do politics influence the distribution and recognition of knowledge? Does anyone know more about sociology of knowledge? Do you guys know Karl Mannheim, Alfred Sch�tz or Bruno Latour?

Re: The Politics of Knowledge

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Who invented the aeroplane? No matter how simple this question may be, my answer (and that of most Brazilians) would differ from what Americans might expect. When I first heard about the Wright Brothers being the inventors (in an American cartoon), I was shocked - "What the hell happened to Santos-Dumont?". He was the name behind two pioneering flights, yet it seemed like his existence was ignored in North America. But that would be oversimplifying, not to mention the problems of empty speculations in general. Later, I found out there was a similar controversy regarding the invention of the telephone. Could it be the case? It would be easy to claim Santos-Dumont was a victim: not only he came from a country that had a poor scientific background, he was black and gay in a somewhat less tolerant era. I'm not bringing up the "white male science" myth, but it begs the question: Why aren't there many famous Asian scholars, in spite of the high levels of education in the Far East? Is there any popular Latin American intellectual? How many of us know anything at all about African thought? Had Chomsky's family remained in Ukraine, would he still be famous? My point being: how much do politics influence the distribution and recognition of knowledge? Does anyone know more about sociology of knowledge? Do you guys know Karl Mannheim, Alfred Sch�tz or Bruno Latour?

from your post it seems politics influence the distribution and recognition of knowledge quite a lot, at least in terms of 'who deserves the credit', with each nation doing its best to make sure their common citizens if not their entire populations are under the perception that their nation is one full of genius and such.

A huge majority of inventions are developed at roughly the same time by many people.

Re: Re: The Politics of Knowledge

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T from your post it seems politics influence the distribution and recognition of knowledge quite a lot, at least in terms of 'who deserves the credit', with each nation doing its best to make sure their common citizens if not their entire populations are under the perception that their nation is one full of genius and such.

quote:

Originally posted by Sunsnail A huge majority of inventions are developed at roughly the same time by many people.

I'm aware of that, such is science. However, it seems that whereas some individuals receive all the credit, others are forgotten, in spite of their contribution.

For example, the greatest publication on Philosophy of Science last century (the Structure of Scientific Revolutions) contained ideas that could also be found in Poland around the same time. However, the Polish guy is often ignored, whereas the American writer is considered one of the most important figures of the 20th century.

What good is a discovery or invention or philosophy if it doesn't widely spread. I think this is why some people are given credit for ideas that arent only theirs. Perhaps these people made the most significant impact with their idea.

quote:

Originally posted by Sunsnail What good is a discovery or invention or philosophy if it doesn't widely spread. I think this is why some people are given credit for ideas that arent only theirs. Perhaps these people made the most significant impact with their idea.

hhmm... I wish it could be so, but let's compare Santos-Dumont and the Wright Brothers.

Santos-Dumont covered a distance of 221 m (725 ft) and, since the plane did not need headwinds or catapults to take off, this flight is considered by some as the first true powered flight. Also, it took place in the city of Paris, where spectators could watch it publicly. Therefore, since the earlier attempts of Pearse, Jatho, Watson, and the Wright brothers received less attention from the popular press than Santos-Dumont's flight, its importance to society, especially in Europe and Brazil, is often considered to be greater than the previous flights.

However, in English speaking countries, I don't think people hear about Santos-Dumont at all.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.