Fair Game Info Is Not Knowledge
Sometime in the 20th century, the world entered the so-called information age, a revolution at least as dramatic as the era in which the first books and pamphlets rolled off Gutenberg's printing press. For the past century, people assumed they got their news exclusively from newspapers and received live radio broadcasts, which were eventually replaced by television news, which would evolve into the 24-hour cable news landscape we live in. And of course we must not forget the World Wide Web.
However, "information" alone is not enough. A mass of data is of no use to anyone unless it is analyzed, evaluated and put into context before any conclusions can be drawn. A simple search on the Internet is enough for some simple questions. For simple math, names, dates, and indisputable, undisputed topics, Wikipedia or Google might be a good place to start, but without a real understanding of the topic, you can't even think critically about it.
Data must be organized in order to be understood. And data sorted without context isn't "knowledge" either. Even if you have a solid foundation of understanding a subject, it is not the same as the wisdom that comes from experience to know what to do with that knowledge.
Richard Hanania is a research associate at Columbia University's Saltzman Institute for War and Peace Studies. Last month he appeared in a controversial tweet about the place of the elderly in our information age. “Perhaps not all old people should commit seppuku, but we need to think creatively about how they can have dignity in a world where many are righteous. the charges. Technology is changing faster and faster, they no longer have any intelligence to offer the new generations. We need new solutions".
Hanania's techno-optimism, however bleak, is a sign of the times. Ironically, this kind of miscalculation—confusing a trove of information with the ability to navigate through it and make something out of it—is a perfect example of the dangers of letting Google do everything. Hanania's tweet was specifically in response to Yale professor Yusuke Narita proposing "mass suicide" to address the "economic burden" of Japan's elderly.
The problem is, even if you have all the answers, if you don't have the how or the why or the experimental wisdom to handle all the intangibles, you are doomed to failure. The information age is here, and no amount of Luddite infatuation is likely to change the course of our technologically dependent society. However, if we are to succeed as a species, understanding the difference between knowledge and wisdom can be crucial.
Knowledge itself can be dangerous. Alexander Pope warned against this, saying that "a little study is a dangerous thing." Accumulating knowledge without the wisdom and emotional intelligence to handle it will always be a risky proposition.
Standard reporter Phillip Fairbanks can be reached at (931) 473-2191.
