Question-How are social changes and changes in knowledge linked? Illustrate your answer using examples from two chapters in book 5
This essay sets out to show how the changes in knowledge and the changes in society are linked by using examples to illustrate the claim and then evaluating the evidence.
To begin with it is useful to define what we mean by social change, the world in which we live constantly changes and those changes are sometimes hard to understand so society gropes for words and ideologies to explain these changes These definitions and ideologies are very much subjective to the time and place, new language skills may be needed, new words creep into everyday use. The old ideologies are challenged and new ideologies that “fit” better are accepted more and more.
The
two examples I have chosen to use for this essay are
Medicine
through the ages (core book 5 pg 11)
This
anecdote traces a patient doctor conversation through the ages. Starting at
2000BC
taking
the shifts in medical thinking right up to modern medicine.
The Dr in the year 2000Bc prescribed a root for the condition, as society at that time was agricultural and slightly spiritual, the root was prescribed for many reasons. These reasons may have been similar to the reasons of Reverend Stone in 1763 when he prescribed willow bark for marsh fever, the nearness of the root to the source of infection, the taste being similar to another known cure or the root may have been shaped like the affected body part (sympathetic medicine). Whatever the reasons the root would not have been prescribed again unless it worked in the cases, however with the placebo effect we have no way of knowing if the effect was real of imagined. In the case of Reverend Stone we can test scientifically now and his theory was validated with modern testing.
The Dr in the year 100AD said, “that medicine is heathen, say this prayer” this shows a shift from folklore to a religious acceptance. By this point in time the source of legitimate knowledge had become religious the power and the authority rested with the clergy. Old ways were classified as folklore and in some case witchcraft. The interesting point here is that the healing power of faith is a documented fact, modern science cannot always explain it but as with most cures they are only accepted if they are seen to work.
The Dr in the 1850’s signaled the beginning of the age of enlightenment where people began to want more proof than just scripture; they began to look for independent proof (that proof could very well be false as there was little scientific method) So called “snake oil salesmen” were offering much the same remedies as the 2000AD DR but claiming scientific backing for their products (and having a good line in persuasion helped)
By
the 1940’s scientific method was becoming important, people were beginning to
ask for proof, backed up by evidence. The pharmaceutical industry was in its
infancy and chemical engineering was beginning to gain pace. The idea of the one
pill cure of all ailments was becoming important to the populace and therefore
was the type of knowledge sought by the scientists.
And
so we come full circle to the modern Dr who says “that pill is artificial take
this root” this shows modern societies gradual shift to a more naturalistic
acceptance. Modern medicine has been shown to cause many problems and a series
of high profile mistakes i.e. cures causing bigger problems than they solve. Has
caused a shift away from unquestioning trust in medical knowledge. Medicine does
not have the answers anymore so people are looking for new sources and types of
knowledge, these knowledge’s are now being tested with the scientific
principles that the older Dr’s lacked. Surprisingly a large number of the old
folk remedies are being verified in tests. Reverend Stones willow bark has been
shown to contain salacetic acid which is a component of Aspirin, and useful in
reducing fever. Wrapping an infected wound in moldy bread pre-dates penicillin
by centauries. And even leaches and maggots have made a comeback in treatments
This
for me nicely illustrates the connection between the society and the knowledge
it produces and accepts, The example given is highly narrative and little
evidence is given as to the content but from what is known of these era’s the
story seems accurate. It comprehensiveness does seem in doubt however as no
mention is made of other forms of knowledge but it seems reasonable to assume
that they would have been treated in a similar way. The shifts in language are
also interesting as language is part of the social construction of knowledge,
from natural to heathen to snake oil to science then back to natural, the words
also give an indication of society at the time. The term natural is very much
open for debate however and never more so than now, we are entering an age of
greater understanding, both of ourselves and of our place in the rest of the
world. This has lead to a growth in the more spiritual and inclusive beliefs;
more commonly called the “new age”
New
age beliefs
There
is it seems no one definition of “new age” beliefs, they range from
spirituality to homeopathy, acupuncture, eco-activists to people who eschew
modern technology. For most people the reason they seek alternative answers is
that conventional sources of knowledge and authority fail to provide answers to
their problems. The old hierarchal knowledge’s are no longer trusted or
comprehensive enough so they seek other ways of seeing the world.
It
is something of a paradox however as the average person likes absolutes, they
like proof, which is something a lot of new age practices lack. This does
however stimulate the scientific community to investigate and produce theories
and experiments to verify or falsify the theory, society driving the production
of knowledge.
The
old remedies like acupuncture and reflexology are being investigated and
verified and this somehow legitimizes them for the broader more skeptical
public.
However
this is also a struggle as highly skeptical scientists often refuse to waste
time on what they see as little more than faith medicine, thus driving the
knowledge produced away from the research that would legitimize the new age
beliefs
The
harder message new age has is that we should understand the place we hold in the
biosphere called Earth, this is hard for some to accept for various reasons and
this causes problems for the acceptance of new age theories. There is both
economic and religious opposition to some of these ideas and as has been seen
these are two very powerful groups with specialized knowledge and authority.
They control the knowledge given to a society. However in this information age
some of that control is slipping but pressure can still be put on anyone
introducing knowledge the authorities do not want i.e. in some states of America
it is still illegal to teach Darwin’s theory of evolution. In societies like
this the information allowed and distributed shapes the society and stunts
research and new knowledge production in areas that are not wanted for them.
So society is shaped by its dominant source of knowledge, up until recently this was scientific knowledge, which was seen to be objective and concrete. However a series of high profile mistakes and failures have caused a questioning to begin. This is nothing new but what does seem to be unusual now is that we are seeing an increase in information and the distribution of that knowledge has created a questioning of the experts that has until now been limited to others in their field. Now experts are answerable to a much larger audience, this has caused a publication of the splits in and field. This has been seen to cause a decline in trust of “expert” knowledge. This lack of trust has caused an uncertainty in the publics perceptions, this in turn leads to a search for alternative systems of belief and knowledge. This in turn affects the type of research done and therefore the type of information produced; science investigates what society deems important. Knowledge is only legitimized in its acceptance by society e.g. even though Darwin’s theory of evolution is accepted and seen as proven by a vast number of societies there are still those who do not accept it (fundamentalist creationists) for them it is not a valid source of knowledge as they accept a source they claim supercedes his evidence .The main source of knowledge for them is a Genesis they take as literal fact. This shapes their society to a different place than the society that accepts Darwin as an expert. It also shapes their research of knowledge as they will not fund or accept any research that comes from knowledge bases they do not agree with. With the rise in technology and more and more knowledge being produced and distributed the link between social change and knowledge seems irrefutable
