Knowing and Ignoring: The Utility of Information
As explained in the opening of this book, science communication is often premised on the idea that knowledge and knowing are inherently good. But knowledge is a messy field. This chapter begins by distinguishing between knowledge, knowing, information and informing. Making the point that information is the currency of science communication, the chapter then considers what makes the information communicated valuable and worthwhile to the audience. Specifically, the relevance of the information to the audience and its usability (broadly understood) are considered. The chapter then offers a mirror discussion on the place (and value) of ignoring and ignorance in science communication.
KeywordsValue of knowledge Value of ignorance Relevance of knowledge
- Ackoff, R. L. (1989). From data to wisdom. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 16(1), 3–9.Google Scholar
- Atwood, M. (2006). The handmaid’s tale. Everyman’s Library Classics.Google Scholar
- Audi, R. (2010). Epistemology: A contemporary introduction to the theory of knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Nisbet, M. C., & Markowitz, E. (2016). Science communication research: Bridging theory and practice. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.Google Scholar
- Pritchard, D., Carter, J. A., & Turri, J. (2018). The value of knowledge. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. From https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-value/.
- Strachey, L. (2003). Eminent victorians. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Taussig, M. T. (1999). Defacement: Public secrecy and the labor of the negative. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Wallace, D. P. (2007). Knowledge management: Historical and cross-disciplinary themes. Westport: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
- World Univeristy Ranking. (2011). Citation averages, 2000–2010, by fields and years. From http://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/citation-averages-2000-2010-by-fields-and-years/415643.article.