To be very honest, I skimmed through the reading for this one. Don’t get me wrong, I got the important bits but just not in the level of detail with which I usually embed this kind of information.
This proseminar was very interesting as well as quite active. Here are the takeaways:
- Proven assumption taken is that people are curious. They’re motivated differently but definitely curious. How do you take a call for an important decision?
- Existing systems and institutions hampering curiosity.
- Don’t confuse questioning authority and expressing curiosity. Both are distinct.
- Basis for human morality outside religion.
- What is science? An accepted (one of many) systems of knowledge.
- What is a systematic study? Systems are based on context (tech, collective knowledge paradigm etc).
- **Epistemic Justice: “**Epistemic injustice is the idea that we can be unfairly discriminated against in our capacity as a knower based on prejudices about the speaker, such as gender, social background, ethnicity, race, sexuality, tone of voice, accent, and so on.” - Biskov, 2020 (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/josp.12348)
- Science existed only for 400 years. Previously, no desire to claim cultural authority over knowledge.
- Binaries close possibilities of open ended exploration.
The session managed to further my understanding a little bit more. There’s so much more to know; it’s frightening. I don’t know if I’ll have enough in time.