Loss of Political Power Through Knowledge. The social order that is looming on our hori- zon is based on knowledge. There is nothing new about the fact that ...
A W O R L D MADE OF KNOWLEDGE N i c o Stehr T ~ r e e v o l u m e of k n o w l e d g e at o u r d i s p o s a l is curntly d o u b l i n g e v e r y five years. W h a t effect is t h e p r e s e n t t r a n s i t i o n f r o m an i n d u s t r i a l to a k n o w l e d g e s o c i e t y having on e m p l o y e e s and comp a n i e s , on p o l i t i c s a n d d e m o c r a c y - - i n s h o r t , on o u r society? Loss o f Political P o w e r T h r o u g h K n o w l e d g e The social o r d e r that is l o o m i n g on o u r horizon is b a s e d on k n o w l e d g e . T h e r e is n o t h i n g n e w a b o u t the fact that o u r s o c i e t y is a b o u t to u n d e r g o a r a p i d t r a n s f o r m a t i o n : in t h e past, p e r i o d s of accelerated social change have been common e n o u g h o c c u r r e n c e s . W h a t is n e w h e r e is b o t h the n a t u r e of and t h e d r i v i n g force b e h i n d t h e s e social, e c o n o m i c a n d c u l t u r a l c h a n g e s . F o r if k n o w l e d g e is n o t just a c o n s t i t u t i v e feature of o u r m o d e r n e c o n o m y b u t a basic o r g a n i z a t i o n a l princ i p l e of the w a y w e run o u r lives, t h e n it is justifiable to talk a b o u t o u r living in a k n o w l e d g e society. This m e a n s n o t h i n g m o r e a n d n o t h i n g less t h a n that w e o r g a n i z e o u r social r e a l i t y on t h e basis of o u r k n o w l e d g e . In the 1950s the G e r m a n s o c i o l o g i s t H e l m u t Schelsky s k e t c h e d o u t his v e r s i o n of a n i g h t m a r e : t h e use of e l e c t r o n i c c a l c u l a t i n g m a c h i n e s raises the s p e c t e r of t h e t o t a l i t a r i a n state, he c l a i m e d . "Such a g o v e r n m e n t m a c h i n e c a n d e m a n d absolute o b e d i e n c e , since it will b e able to p r e d i c t a n d p l a n the f u t u r e w i t h p e r f e c t reliability," he p r o p h e s i e d , a n d "in t h e face of t e c h n i c a l l y guara n t e e d truth, all o p p o s i t i o n is irrational." Half a c e n t u r y later t h e A m e r i c a n e n t r e p r e n e u r a n d fut u r o l o g i s t Bill J o y is w a r n i n g us of a d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t p o s s e s s e s similarly n i g h t m a r i s h c h a r a c t e r i s tics: his greatest fear is that n a n o t e c h n o l o g y m i g h t start to evolve i n d e p e n d e n t l y of its h u m a n creators. This a n d o t h e r t e c h n o l o g i e s of the f u t u r e
c o u l d p u t the h u m a n r a c e on t h e e n d a n g e r e d species list, he claims. Schelsky's p r e d i c t i o n w a s r i g h t in line w i t h t h e z e i t g e i s t p r e v a i l i n g in t h e m i d d l e of t h e last cent u r y - a n d as Joy's a d m o n i t i o n s show, this zeitgeist is s h o w i n g n o signs of aging. This p h e n o m e n o n is t h e r e s u l t of a s y m p t o m a t i c o v e r e s t i m a t i o n of t h e p o w e r of m o d e r n k n o w l e d g e a n d t e c h n o l o g y . Yet p a r a d o x i c a l l y it is p r e c i s e l y k n o w l e d g e a n d t e c h n o l o g y t h a t are p e r h a p s t h e m o s t s i g n i f i c a n t s o u r c e s of t h e o p e n , i n d e t e r m i n a t e s o c i e t y t h a t is g r o w i n g u p a r o u n d us today. D e s p i t e all p e s s i mistic p r e d i c t i o n s w e n o w find o u r s e l v e s w i t n e s s ing t h e e n d of t h e h e g e m o n y of s u c h m o n o l i t h i c i n s t i t u t i o n s as t h e state, t h e c h u r c h a n d t h e military. T h e c o n d u c t o f t h e l a t t e r ' s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s b e t r a y s a g r o w i n g s k e p t i c i s m as to t h e i r c o n t i n u ing c a p a c i t y to r e g u l a t e social c o n d i t i o n s : c o n t r o l ling, p l a n n i n g a n d p r e d i c t i n g social c o n d i t i o n s are b e c o m i n g i n c r e a s i n g l y m o r e difficult. S o c i e t y has b e c o m e m o r e "fragile." Yet it is n e i t h e r globalizat i o n n o r t h e e c o n o m i z a t i o n of social r e l a t i o n s t h a t is r e s p o n s i b l e for this state of affairs b u t t h e loss of p o l i t i c a l p o w e r t h r o u g h k n o w l e d g e . T h e age of i n d u s t r i a l i s m is c o m i n g to an end; t h e skills a n d e x p e r t i s e t h a t w e r e n e c e s s a r y to m a i n t a i n t h e social o r d e r of i n d u s t r i a l i s m are losing t h e i r efficacy. The s o c i a l o r d e r t h a t is l o o m i n g on o u r h o r i z o n is b a s e d o n k n o w l e d g e . T h e Age o f K n o w l e d g e W o r k O n e c a n d e f i n e k n o w l e d g e as "the c a p a c i t y to act," as t h e p o t e n t i a l to "start s o m e t h i n g going." Thus s c i e n t i f i c o r t e c h n i c a l k n o w l e d g e is p r i m a rily n o t h i n g o t h e r t h a n t h e ability to act. T h e privil e g e d status of s c i e n t i f i c and t e c h n i c a l k n o w l e d g e in m o d e r n s o c i e t y is d e r i v e d n o t f r o m t h e fact that scientific d i s c o v e r i e s are generally c o n s i d e r e d
A WORLD MADE OF KNOWLEDGE
89
to be credible, objective, in c o n f o r m i t y with reality, or even indisputable, but from the fact that this form of knowledge, more than any other, incessantly creates n e w o p p o r t u n i t i e s for action. These o p p o r t u n i t i e s may be a p p r o p r i a t e d either b y private individuals, or c o r p o r a t i o n s , or the s t a t e - - a l t h o u g h f r e q u e n c y such a p p r o p r i a t i o n is only temporary. In addition, scientific discoveries do not usually live up to the reputation of infallibility t h e y possess: they are very often disputed, and despite its social standing scientific k n o w l e d g e is almost always questionable. For this very reason it is continually losing, at least temporarily, its practical relevance. Scientific i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s m u s t c o m e to a " c o n c l u s i o n " - - o n l y then do they have any practical value. In our m o d e r n society, this task of bringing trains of t h o u g h t to a c o n c l u s i o n and rendering scientific insights "useful" is carried out by "knowledge workers." What is n e w about this d e v e l o p m e n t is not the creation of work based on k n o w l e d g e - - t h e r e have always been "experts" t h r o u g h o u t history. W h a t is n e w is the large n u m b e r of professions that involve w o r k i n g with knowledge. At the same time the n u m b e r of jobs that d e m a n d low cognitive skills is rapidly declining, resulting in less and less p e o p l e being involved in the m a n u f a c t u r e and distribution of material goods.
Living in Knowledge Societies This trend towards the d e v e l o p m e n t of fragile social systems is clearly the result of an ( u n e v e n ) e x t e n s i o n of individuals' c a p a c i t y for action in m o d e r n societies. The p o w e r of large institutions is being increasingly u n d e r m i n e d and replaced by small groups w i t h a growing capacity for action. Using the term "fragility" to designate this state of affairs is intended to underline the fact that not only has the capacity of s u p p o s e d l y p o w e r ful institutions to "control" society declined but so has their capacity to predict social developments. But w h a t has caused society's c e n t e r of gravity to shift in this way? What forms is this dev e l o p m e n t taking, and w h a t c o n s e q u e n c e s will it have? I believe that these social changes are coming a b o u t because knowledge is no longer simply a means of accessing, of unlocking, the w o r l d ' s secrets but itself represents a w o r l d in the process of c o m i n g into b e i n g - - a w o r l d in w h i c h in all spheres of endeavor k n o w l e d g e is increasingly b e c o m i n g both the basis and the guiding principle of h u m a n activity. In o t h e r words, w e n o w orga-
90
SOCIETY 9 NOVEMBER/ DECEMBER 2001
nize our reality based on the k n o w l e d g e w e possess. Of course, since time i m m e m o r i a l knowledge has played an i m p o r t a n t role in h u m a n society: all interpersonal relationships are based on the p r i n c i p l e that p e o p l e p o s s e s s k n o w l e d g e a b o u t each other. And political p o w e r has n e v e r b e e n b a s e d purely on physical force; it has always relied in part on superior k n o w l e d g e . After all, social rep r o d u c t i o n is n o t just a p h y s i c a l p r o c e s s but a l s o - - a l w a y s - - a cultural process: in o t h e r words, it implies the r e p r o d u c t i o n of knowledge. In this sense one can also c o n s i d e r past social structures as early forms o f " k n o w l e d g e societies." Take, for instance, early Jewish society that was s t r u c t u r e d a c c o r d i n g to the religious and legal k n o w l e d g e e m b o d i e d in the Torah, or ancient Egypt, in w h i c h religious and a s t r o n o m i c a l k n o w l e d g e , as well as agricultural k n o w l e d g e , was the basis of p o w e r and the organizational principle of society. The rise of entire civilizations such as the Aztec, Roman and Chinese empires, was based in the final analysis on their s u p e r i o r k n o w l e d g e or information technologies. Even back then, political p o w e r was n e v e r simply a case o f physical d o m i n a n c e . Consequently, k n o w l e d g e is a universal, anthropological characteristic of the h u m a n race. Thus k n o w l e d g e societies arise not as the result of simple, one dimensional p r o c e s s e s of social change. Their c r e a t i o n does not follow any single, easily recognizable pattern of development. Although m o d e r n d e v e l o p m e n t s in c o m m u n i c a tion and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n t e c h n o l o g y have b r o u g h t p e o p l e closer together, regions, cities and villages are still by and large isolated from each other. The w o r l d may be o p e n i n g up, and the circulation of fashions, g o o d s and p e o p l e b e c o m i n g m o r e intense, but differing c o n v i c t i o n s as to w h a t is "sacred" still create i n s u r m o u n t a b l e barriers to communication. The m e a n i n g s of such c o n c e p t s as "time" and "place" are u n d e r g o i n g transformation, but b o r d e r s s e p a r a t i n g p e o p l e c o n t i n u e to be objects of intense r e s p e c t and even celebration. T h o u g h fascinated b y globalization, w e also live in an age o b s e s s e d b y identity and ethnicity. The trend towards the global "simultaneity" of events is a c c o m p a n i e d by a territorialization of sensibilities and a regionalization o f conflicts.
The Social Role of Knowledge Nevertheless a t t e m p t s to c o m p r e h e n d the social functions of m o d e r n science and t e c h n o l o g y have always c o m e up against a dead end. Gener-
ally speaking, both conservative and liberal analyses of social p r o c e s s e s c o n c l u d e w i t h s o m b e r p r o p h e c i e s of a w o r l d d o m i n a t e d by science and technology. This vision predicts n o t simply the d e s t r u c t i o n of h u m a n i t y ' s natural facilities, its emotional life, but also of its intellectual facilities and its capacity for exercising free will. Modern theories of history posit a r e d u c t i o n rather than a b r o a d e n i n g of o p p o r t u n i t i e s for d e v e l o p m e n t in today's society. Yet if o n e is to start to u n d e r stand the political, social a n d e c o n o m i c proc e s s e s that are taking p l a c e today, t h e n o n e m u s t cast aside s u c h clich6s. For it is n o t the r e d u c t i o n o f o u r c a p a c i t y for a c t i o n that is currently radically t r a n s f o r m i n g the i n s t i t u t i o n s of m o d e r n s o c i e t y but p r e c i s e l y a t r e m e n d o u s e x p a n s i o n o f this c a p a c i t y - - w h i l e at the same time this e x p a n s i o n is g e n e r a t i n g a s e n s a t i o n of socialstasis. Collective u n e a s e and o b s t a c l e s to a c t i o n are t h e flip side of individual restlessness in knowledge societies. Extending individual opportunities for action does not necessarily o p e n the d o o r to h a p p i n e s s - - a s s h o w n by tourism, the b u r g e o n i n g information media, and c o n s u m e r i s m in general. In discourses generated by m a n y politicians, theologians, p h i l o s o p h e r s and social scientists, the individual is posited as being a defenseless "victim" of p o w e r f u l institutions. They argue that p e o p l e lose the capacity for action in prop o r t i o n as science and t e c h n o l o g y triumph. It is often maintained that the latter actually r e d u c e the capacity of the individual to participate in social p r o c e s s e s , f o s t e r i n g i s o l a t i o n , i n v a d i n g p e o p l e ' s privacy and generating a sense of helplessness.
The Fragility of Society Against this it can be argued that the processes triggered off by the g r o w t h of science and technology, w h i c h allegedly lead to m o r e regimentation, in reality have precisely the o p p o s i t e effect on our capacity for social action to that of reducing it. Rather, w h a t is striking is the g r o w i n g "fragility" of social structures. M o d e r n societies are characterized above all by "self-generated" structures and the capacity to d e t e r m i n e their futures t h e m s e l v e s - - a n d c o n s e q u e n t l y by the potential for self-destruction. However, m o d e r n societies are not politically fragile and socially volatile because they are "liberal d e m o c r a c i e s " but b e c a u s e they are "knowledge-based" societies. Only knowledge is capable of increasing the d e m o c r a t i c potential of liberal societies.
One peculiarity of the m a n y and varied debates on the roles of k n o w l e d g e , information, and technological k n o w - h o w in our m o d e r n society is their one-sidedness. T h e y mostly e m p h a s i z e the problems caused by the individual's being cut off f r o m specialist knowledge and technical c o m p e t e n c e - resulting in the individual's allegedly being forced into the role of"victim": exploited consumer, alienated tourist, incapacitated patient, b o r e d s c h o o l kid, or manipulated voter. The p r o p o n e n t s of such a v i e w p o i n t also delight in e x p o s i n g the "repressive" potential of the g r o w t h of scientific knowledge and the proliferation of t e c h n o l o g i c a l artif a c t s - e s p e c i a l l y w h e n the latter are exploited b y such s u p p o s e d l y p o w e r f u l entities as state a n d i n d u s t r y to e x e r c i s e total social c o n t r o l . Yet dire p r o p h e c i e s t h a t t h e s e w o u l d e s t a b l i s h t h e m s e l v e s in u n a s s a i l a b l e p o s i t i o n s o f p o w e r have n o t b e e n fulfilled. For t o o long, d e b a t e a m o n g social s c i e n t i s t s o n t h e social role o f k n o w l e d g e w a s c e n t e r e d o n social class, t h e state, the p r o f e s s i o n s and the s c i e n c e s - - a perspective that was o f t e n precisely d e t e r m i n e d b y fear of an i m m i n e n t c o n c e n t r a t i o n of p o w e r in the h a n d s of o n e o f these social groups. Yet an objective evaluation of the social role of knowledge must c o m e to the c o n c l u s i o n that the spread of k n o w l e d g e has n o t only b r o u g h t with it "enormous" risks and u n c e r t a i n t y but also a"liberating capacity for action."
Uncertainty Through Knowledge But all this does n o t m e a n that from n o w o n e v e r y consumer, patient, and s c h o o l kid will immediately be able to recognize, u n d e r s t a n d and c o n t r o l o p p o r t u n i t i e s for action that c o m e their way o n an e v e r y d a y basis. An increase in o p p o r tunities for social action should not be misconstrued as bringing w i t h it the elimination of all risk, accident, and a r b i t r a r i n e s s - - i n general of all c i r c u m s t a n c e s over w h i c h the individual has lithe control. The flip side of e m a n c i p a t i o n t h r o u g h knowledge is the risks p o s e d by the e m a n c i p a t o r y potential of k n o w l e d g e . The increasing spread of knowledge in society and the c o n c o m i t a n t g r o w t h in o p p o r t u n i t i e s for action also generate social uncertainty. For s c i e n c e c a n n o t p r o v i d e us w i t h "truths," only w i t h m o r e or less well-founded hyp o t h e s e s and probabilities. Thus far from b e i n g a source of secure k n o w l e d g e , of certainty, s c i e n c e is a s o u r c e o f u n c e r t a i n t y and thus of social and political problems. K n o w l e d g e societies o f the future will be c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a w i d e range o f
A WORLD MADE OF KNOWLEDGE
91
imponderabilia, u n e x p e c t e d reversals and o t h e r unpleasant surprises. The increasing fragility of k n o w l e d g e societies will generate n e w kinds of moral questions, as well as a questions as to w h o or w h a t is responsible for our society's oft cited political stagnation. If k n o w l e d g e is the main constitutive characteristic of m o d e r n society, then the p r o d u c t i o n , reproduction, distribution and realization of k n o w l e d g e c a n n o t avoid b e c o m i n g p o l i t i c i z e d . Thus o n e o f the m o s t i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n s fac-
ing us in the n e x t d e c a d e will be h o w to m o n i t o r and c o n t r o l k n o w l e d g e . This will entail t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a n e w b r a n c h o f policy science: k n o w l e d g e policy. K n o w l e d g e p o l i c y will regulate the rapidly g r o w i n g v o l u m e o f n e w k n o w l edge in o u r s o c i e t y and i n f l u e n c e its d e v e l o p ment.
Nico Stehr is professor e m e r i t u s o f sociology at the University o f Alberta a n d a f e l l o w o f the Center f o r A d v a n c e d Cultural Studies in Germany.
Karl M a n n h e i m ' s S o c i o l o g y as Political E d u c a t i o n Colin Loader and David Kettler 0-7658-0109-4 (cloth) 2001 215 pp. $49.95/s
Crisis in S o c i o l o g y The Need for Darwin Joseph Lopreato and Timothy Crippen 0-7658-0874-9 (paper) 2001 343 pp. $29.95/s
Building Social S e c u r i t y : The C h a l l e n g e of P r i v a t i z a t i o n International Social Security Series, volume 6 Xenia ScheiI-Adlung, editor 0-7658-0878-1 (paper) 2001 329 pp. $29.95/s
S t a r t i n g the T w e n t y - F i r s t C e n t u r y Ernest Krausz and Gitta Tulea, editors 0-7658-0098-5 (cloth) 2001 185 pp. $39.95/s
Revolutionary Biology David P. Barash 0-7658-0067-5 (cloth) 2001 215 pp. $29.951s
Order from your bookstore or direct from the publisher. (*Availablefrom TransactioninNorthAmericaonly.)
92
SOCIETY 9 NOVEMBER/ DECEMBER 2001
Visit our web site for on-linespecials. www. transactionpub, com *individual credit card orders only.
