An "epistemology of ignorance" is an examination of the ways of thinking and knowing which deliberately, both actively and passively, exclude information or portray information that is not correct. In both of the readings it is clear that this is done primarily from the standpoint of the powerful having control of what is known and not known. In Ortega's description of the "arrogant eye", in which the person in power, through social constructs and other forms of structural oppression, sees people and things only as objects that can satisfy desires. This is also demonstrates by Tuana who discusses how birth control studies usually don't delve into the possibilities of male birth control because the male is being treated as the active sexual member. Tuana also discusses the ways that people are ignorant, sometimes through believes people are willfully ignorant, sometimes others want people to not know.
This is seen in China, where internet usage is severely monitored and censored. Citizens are not able to access social media as well as blogs and world news outlets like the New York Times. This is an example of an external force wanting a group of people to be ignorant of certain information. Tuana states, "This type of ignorance abounds. Some knowledge is rendered secret because
of national security or because of business interests. Another reason for withholding
knowledge concerns profits, but with a darker side than trade secrets." (Tuana 9)
For more information on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_China
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-06/china-tightens-its-grip-on-the-internet/6067990
Tuana, Nancy. "The Speculum of Ignorance: The Women's Health Movement Epistemologies of Ignorance." JSTOR. Wiley, 2006. Web. 08 Feb. 2015.
I like your definition of epistemology of ignorance. I found it interesting how you compared it to the censorship China uses. Originally, I only viewed this topic as a purposeful dismissal of possible information, in that the pursuer of knowledge refused to investigate further due to the information being regarded as insignificant, irrelevant, or simply non-existing. The approach of purposefully ignoring already existing information did not really cross my mind even while going through our readings until you brought it up in your post. Would you consider that a new factor of the epistemology of ignorance, similar to those we discussed in class today? It could be its own category. In fact, the epistemology could be divided into these sections, with maybe two or so added, and from there it could stem out into the descriptions Professor McAfee gave us.
ReplyDelete