Dear Ali
It is true that the social nature of knowing has been a basis assumption of the sociology of knowledge. But much as in Foucault's conceptual framework, the sociology of knowledge has emphasized the causality of collective knowing on individual knowing. Ideology is one example, religious beliefs is another, professional expertise is another. If you read the book, this is far from what the authors are arguing and I have been suggesting for years: it is the interaction among people that brings divisions of cognitive competencies together. This is why I have been building my approach to design on conversations among stakeholders, on the spontaneous emergence of stakeholder networks.
This is not to be confused with the sociology of knowledge's emphasis on sharing knowledge.
klaus
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 26, 2017, at 2:58 PM, Ali Ilhan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear Klaus,
>
> This seems like a very interesting book. It is also interesting to note the
> disciplinary differences on the subject matter.One of the core claims of
> sociology of knowledge and science and technology studies, since their
> inception (at least in the Anglo-Saxon scholarship) is a strong emphasis on
> the social component of knowing and knowledge creation.
>
> Yours,
>
> ali
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|