Knowledge
From Geography
| (11 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Background == | == Background == | ||
| - | Conceptions of knowing within theoretical approaches in geography significantly vary. For instance, between modernist conceptions of knowledge and | + | Conceptions of knowing within theoretical approaches, practices and ideologies in geography significantly vary. For instance, between modernist conceptions of knowledge and the perspectives of knowledge in [[post-structuralism]]. Understanding how an approach conceptualises knowledge is crucial because of the implications this has on research. |
== Contextual meaning == | == Contextual meaning == | ||
| - | Within poststructuralist perspective knowledge is understood as multiple, contradictory, and powerful rather than as singular, cumulative and neutral (Gibson-Graham, 2000,pp.95). | + | Within poststructuralist perspective knowledge is understood as multiple, contradictory, and powerful rather than as singular, cumulative and neutral. Knowledge is not seen as reflective of meaning already existing in objects, rather as constantly being constructed and re-constructed in [[discourse]] (Hall, 1997 pp.44). Thus knowledge is seen to actively shape reality than passively reflecting it. Knowledge, in this sense, is seen as a social process in its own right.Therefore, there can be no accurate and inaccurate knowledge, or low or high knowledge, instead there are varying knowledges based on the varying effects they have on different subjects, the institutions and practices they allow and reject or suppress(Gibson-Graham, 2000,pp.95-101). |
| + | ==Example== | ||
| + | Knowledge in geography is very important for it to shape its vision and structure. As mentioned above the use of knowledge differs between different type of geography. When using knowledge seen as ´truthful´ and objective its influence on research will be substantial, in a particular way. At the same time it will vision an idea of a person and with that it will form a society. On the contrary, when it is seen as subjective its influence will at least be different, same as its use. This shows how knowledge is something that can be used in various ways. | ||
| + | It can be used as a form of power to control or to help. With this example the contribution it delivers to geography can be different in the way it is used, there is no question however about its influence and importance on geography. | ||
====References==== | ====References==== | ||
* Gibson-Graham, J.K. (2000), 'Poststructural Interventions', in T.Barnes & R.Sheppard(eds.) A Companion to Economic Geography. Oxford: Blackwell | * Gibson-Graham, J.K. (2000), 'Poststructural Interventions', in T.Barnes & R.Sheppard(eds.) A Companion to Economic Geography. Oxford: Blackwell | ||
| + | * Hall, Stuart. (ed.) (1997), 'Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices'. Sage. London. UK | ||
====Contributors==== | ====Contributors==== | ||
* "page created by Kolar Aparna"--[[User:Kolaraparna|Kolaraparna]] 11:04, 11 September 2011 (UTC) | * "page created by Kolar Aparna"--[[User:Kolaraparna|Kolaraparna]] 11:04, 11 September 2011 (UTC) | ||
| + | *''Page enhanced by Paul van den Hogen--[[PaulHogen|Paulhogen]]''--[[User:PaulHogen|PaulHogen]] 21:51, 24 October 2012 (CEST) | ||
Latest revision as of 19:51, 24 October 2012
Contents |
Background
Conceptions of knowing within theoretical approaches, practices and ideologies in geography significantly vary. For instance, between modernist conceptions of knowledge and the perspectives of knowledge in post-structuralism. Understanding how an approach conceptualises knowledge is crucial because of the implications this has on research.
Contextual meaning
Within poststructuralist perspective knowledge is understood as multiple, contradictory, and powerful rather than as singular, cumulative and neutral. Knowledge is not seen as reflective of meaning already existing in objects, rather as constantly being constructed and re-constructed in discourse (Hall, 1997 pp.44). Thus knowledge is seen to actively shape reality than passively reflecting it. Knowledge, in this sense, is seen as a social process in its own right.Therefore, there can be no accurate and inaccurate knowledge, or low or high knowledge, instead there are varying knowledges based on the varying effects they have on different subjects, the institutions and practices they allow and reject or suppress(Gibson-Graham, 2000,pp.95-101).
Example
Knowledge in geography is very important for it to shape its vision and structure. As mentioned above the use of knowledge differs between different type of geography. When using knowledge seen as ´truthful´ and objective its influence on research will be substantial, in a particular way. At the same time it will vision an idea of a person and with that it will form a society. On the contrary, when it is seen as subjective its influence will at least be different, same as its use. This shows how knowledge is something that can be used in various ways. It can be used as a form of power to control or to help. With this example the contribution it delivers to geography can be different in the way it is used, there is no question however about its influence and importance on geography.
References
- Gibson-Graham, J.K. (2000), 'Poststructural Interventions', in T.Barnes & R.Sheppard(eds.) A Companion to Economic Geography. Oxford: Blackwell
- Hall, Stuart. (ed.) (1997), 'Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices'. Sage. London. UK
Contributors
- "page created by Kolar Aparna"--Kolaraparna 11:04, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
- Page enhanced by Paul van den Hogen--Paulhogen--PaulHogen 21:51, 24 October 2012 (CEST)
