Information used to be the province of an elite. From the invention of writing onward, each achievement in the development of information technology has made information increasingly accessible to more and more people. What McLuhan called “the Gutenberg Galaxy”– world culture after the invention of the printing press with movable metal type in 1450–has been followed by the technology of electricity and all that it has made possible, from the telegraph to the Internet. The effect of these technical developments has been the democratization of information: now anyone, anywhere, has access to all the information available to the intellectual elite.
Information, however, is not knowledge, nor is it understanding. Knowledge is information coherently integrated into a whole; knowledge is information that can be used productively. Information by itself is inert, mere data. Knowledge is linked information, organized purposefully and linked to other information similarly organized. Understanding is depth of knowledge, a grasp of its nature, of how knowledge works.
Because information has become democratized, many without knowledge have nonetheless a conceit of knowledge. Everyone has an opinion, informed by information if not knowledge, and every opinion is now expressible and available in the public sphere. Formerly, only the elites had informed opinions about matters beyond the narrow interests of economic and social life. Now, by virtue of “social media,” of which this “web-log” is a part, anyone can make a claim on the attention of others beyond his or her immediate acquaintance.
I have resisted the temptation to enter the “blogosphere” until now. What is the value of adding to what Bellow called “the noise” and what Beckett called “the mess”–this “blooming buzzing confusion” that William James called the activity of the infantile brain? With a nod to the butterfly in Indonesia that, by flapping its wings begins a string of causation that eventuates in a hurricane in New Jersey, where I live, I’ve decided that I have nothing to lose by dipping my toe into this stream. The effect on the stream is likely to be small (but who knows?), and in sum the whole business is likely to be a harmless way for me to explore and publish what the decades have taught me and have led me to question.
So, let there be communication. Let all jump into the stream, the river, the ocean, and let the initial discord and cacophony swirl until a euphony emerges. Who says euphony will come of it? I don’t know. Let’s call it a faith–a faith in the value of information that leads to knowledge that leads to reflection that leads to wisdom that leads to survival that leads to prosperity that leads to affirmation that leads to the Good that leads to what some call God.
****
RES PUBLICA 
“…in sum the whole business is likely to be a harmless way for me to explore and publish what the decades have taught me and have led me to question.”
One danger is that it’s addictive! Another related danger is how much time it can take if you don’t manage it properly and put it in perspective (which is hard to do). Once you get a bit of blogging power, it can be hard to put down–hard to accept the fact that the effect on the stream is discernible, but small. When you see the occasional ripple, there’s a tendency to want to turn it into a wave–and then another wave, and another. At worst, it can be a bit like playing the slots.
But that’s a cautionary note, not an attempt at dissuasion! I’m glad that you’ve entered the blogosphere. The blogosphere needs people who’ve read their Shakespeare and Blake.
LikeLike
Thanks, Irfan. BTW, I find your site extremely informative and thoughtful.
LikeLike