A cursory glance at key debates in
different branches of the human, social and natural sciences reveals that scholars’
primary, if not the only, focus is on whether or how one gets things right
theoretically, methodologically, analytically and empirically. The holy grail of this preoccupation is the notion, and, of course, the attainment of,
expertise.
Expert knowledge represents the pinnacle of
scholarship’s achievement. To the extent that scholarship is viewed as
polar opposite of politics, expertise exemplifies in the highest order the
success, or the aspiration to succeed, of the community of scholars in transcending the contaminating
influences of the social environment. What is often overlooked, it should be noted, is the
possibility that no matter how good scholarship is, it cannot exist in a socio-political
vacuum. In many instances expertise is precisely what the powerful and the
unscrupulous need and, in fact, use often to advance or justify their
interests, usually at the expense of the unsuspecting public.
Any
scholar who produces knowledge by undertaking research or by any other means
starts with good intentions. The moment the results are published, however,
knowledge assumes a life of its own; it circulates and is used in society in ways
independent of the original intent. Scholars often absolve themselves of the responsibility
by skirting around it, thinking in all honesty that their job ends co-terminus
with the boundaries of scientific knowledge production. Easily set aside is the
likelihood that exactly it is their expertise that lends knowledge a lasting credibility
and power that enable both legitimate use and misuse of knowledge. It ought to
be recognized, therefore, that good intentions and strict adherence to
established scholarly protocols are not, or cannot be, enough. Knowledge, regardless of
accuracy, is not inherently amoral or neutral; it is the fluid contexts of
knowledge production, distribution, consumption and evaluation that decide.
This
situation calls for greater and concerted efforts to document, analyse and map
out the range of actual and potential uses and abuses of expert knowledge in
various fields of human endeavour. As the evolving national, regional and
global order increasingly locates knowledge at the centre of almost everything—as
exemplified, for example, by the notions of knowledge society and knowledge
economy—there is a corresponding demand for a greater accountability in knowledge
use. The sustainability and vitality of the public sphere that protects and
promotes the welfare of common people hinge on the transparency of knowledge
production, distribution and consumption. At the end of the day, we scholars do not wish
to inadvertently inflict harm in our efforts to do good.
What
seems needed is to strengthen significantly the early warning mechanism within
scholarship itself to help minimize, if not neutralize, the misuse of knowledge. The scholarly community is not
totally oblivious of the need for this mechanism. Awareness has always been
there right from the beginning as clearly indicated in the presence of the code
of ethics in every profession, including scholarship. Unfortunately, the persistently
marginal (or marginalized) status of any field that examines knowledge socio-politics,
such as social epistemology and sociology of knowledge (including the sub-fields it spawned such as
sociology of scientific knowledge, SSK), and the backlash against or the long receding influence within
the academy of the critique of knowledge
that the proponents of postcolonialism-poststructuralism-postmodernism have long underscored,
indicate the less than adequate appreciation and efforts of the scholarly
community in general to address attendant problems—both potential and actual.
In
UBD, a few colleagues and I have formed a group within the Science and
Technology Research Cluster precisely for this purpose. Called the Good Knowledge Gone Bad sub-cluster, our
group—with members from education, health science and social sciences—seeks to develop
a mechanism for monitoring and examining the actual use and abuse of knowledge
in our respective fields. We are a new group and we wish to extend an
invitation to anyone, in any field of studies, who shares our concern to join
us in this undertaking. We shall form an international network of scholars who
are keenly interested in helping prevent the misuse of knowledge in our own
fields. Anyone interested may signify intention to participate by sending a CV
to racuramingubd@gmail.com
