Does it matter if our acquisition of knowledge happens in 'Bubbles' where some information and voices are excluded? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

Jon Kabat-Zinn, American professor emeritus of medicine, suggests our thoughts are “bubbles waiting to be popped” (Kabat-Zinn, n.d.). In the context of this essay, “knowledge bubbles” refer to spaces where some voices and information are included, others excluded. The worlds of doctors, scientists, politicians, religious figures, and the elite are each exclusionary bubbles or communities of knowers: people connected through a common understanding of a topic, a belief system, or shared opinions. This essay approaches the question: does it matter if knowledge bubbles remain intact; does this create an impact, positive or negative, for whom?

 

Firstly, it is important to discern between the different forms of knowledge bubbles. An epistemic bubble is a social structure in which “other relevant voices have been left out, perhaps accidentally” (Nyungen, 2018). An echo chamber, on the other hand, is “a social epistemic structure from which other relevant voices have been actively excluded and discredited”; its members “have been brought to systematically distrust all outside sources” (ibid.). This essay examines both forms of knowledge bubbles; though, in my view, acquisition of knowledge in echo chambers can have more negative effects than epistemic bubbles, since echo chambers are deliberate impediments to outside voices.

 

For natural scientists, in many ways, it matters if acquisition of knowledge occurred in bubbles; knowledge bubbles can have a negative impact. An echo chamber composed of those who are not scientific experts can be damaging if the beliefs and opinions circulating within are biased yet portrayed as factual. Throughout history, many judgements or discoveries by scientists have been rejected by wider society. Although public participation in scientific discourse can be beneficial, when criticisms of scientific knowledge are based upon little empirical evidence, this can be problematic. The rejection of proven facts, especially by those in power, can have detrimental effects on public policies. From 1999-2008, the HIV/AIDS policies of ex-South African president, Thabo Mbeki, caused 330,000 avoidable deaths (Roeder, 2014). Antiretroviral drugs preventing transmission of HIV from mother to child and extending patients’ lives emerged as the best way solution for the epidemic (MSF, n.d.). Mbeki opposed such drugs and set up “the Presidential Advisory Panel on AIDS”, a veritable echo chamber from which members of the public and press (except one journalist) were excluded (Sidley, 2000). It would seem that the scientists gathered were chosen by Mbeki to support his stance. For 10 years, Mbeki’s restriction of access to these essential drugs caused human suffering as the deaths could have been avoided with proper treatment. This is the reason why knowledge bubbles, especially those purposefully constructed to exclude the consensus of experts, can be harmful to society. Undoubtedly, spaces that exclude experts are not necessarily negative, as they allow development of opinions and imagination; however, when knowledge produced in such bubbles is represented as factual, and influences policies, this can be destructive.

 

The existence of bubbles in which acquisition of knowledge takes place can also be harmful when experts in the natural sciences become prejudiced, and are not challenged due to the strength of the echo chamber in excluding other voices. When scientific discoveries propagate racism and discrimination, due to the knowledge bubbles in which scientists exchange ideas, this can be problematic. Until the 19th century, polygenism, a theory regarding human races (i.e. skin colours) as different species, was used as a means to give rise to scientific racism (Smith, 2014). Scientific polygenists utilised cranial measurements to prove that races are innately unequal (Wade, 2021). One of the earliest pioneers of this theory was Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus: in the 10th edition of “Systema Naturae”, Linnaeus described four human races as “European (white), African (black), Asian (yellow) and American (red)” (Charmantier, 2020). Linnaeus, along with other polygenists, inhabited a knowledge bubble solely composed of white and male scientists from Western countries. This knowledge bubble could also be considered an echo chamber as diverse voices and opinions were deliberately excluded. This bubble of knowledge had a significant negative impact on science because it created knowledge that justifies prejudice and discrimination in society.

 

Although the formation of knowledge bubbles can be negative in some ways, there are advantages for artists in regards to productivity. Throughout history, feelings of exclusion have led to creativity and even the formation of a sub-genre of art. Outsider art is “art produced by an untrained idiosyncratic artist who is typically unconnected to the conventional art world - not by choice but by circumstance” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2020). Art brut is a label coined by French artist, Jean Dubuffet, who took an “anticultural position” on art, advocating for “instinct, passion, mood, violence, madness” (Dubuffet, 1951). Dubuffet was inspired by art made by psychiatric patients. Art by those with mental illness has been of interest by historians, art critics and psychiatrists for decades (Beveridge, 2001). Mentally ill people are considered among the most excluded from society. Studies have suggested that social exclusion fuels creativity (Kim et al., 2013). Links have been established between creative genius and mental disorders such as manic depression and bipolar disorder, that lead to alienation from society (ScienceDaily, 2002). Social exclusion should not, however, be justified because it produces high-quality knowledge about art. Nonetheless, if certain non-mainstream artists are inspired by exclusion, this could be considered a benefit of acquiring knowledge in a bubble.

 

Another positive effect that can occur when knowledge is acquired in bubbles is the fostering of collaboration and creativity. Artist colonies have existed since the nineteenth century in Europe and the US as rural retreats for those working in creative industries (Lübbren, 2001). Artist colonies can be incubators for inspiration and collaboration. Being surrounded by others with similar aspirations can help a creative person become more motivated, be in a “flow-state” (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2002) and can serve as “mutual support groups” (Lübbren, 2001). Since creative industries are often under-supported, and individuals often struggle to secure financial stability, artist colonies allow for opportunities to network and exchange insider knowledge about the workplace. Artist colonies are intentional communities, “a group of people who have chosen to live together with a common purpose, working cooperatively to create a lifestyle that reflects their shared core values” (Blue, 2017). Artist colonies have positive impacts on their residents; however, the migration of artists from urban centres to rural areas could be viewed as an example of “brain drain” or “human capital flight”, defined as “the situation in which large numbers of educated and very skilled people leave their own country to live and work in another one where pay and conditions are better” (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d.). Artists have an important role in society, and their presence in spaces such as cities brings artistic knowledge into communities. The presence of artists can lead to cross-germination of ideas with other Areas of Knowledge. In summary, artist colonies can be advantageous to artists, but this matters if some communities are devoid of artists because of the valuable artistic knowledge they bring .

 

Similarly, acquisition of knowledge in bubbles can have positive effects on scientists. Peer reviews are essential ways of validating research, in a “process of someone reading, checking, and giving his or her opinion about something that has been written by another scientist or expert working in the same subject area” (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d.). By nature of the scientific method, scientists find themselves in bubbles of knowledge in interdependent communities of other experts in related fields. Moreover, learned societies, which are organisations “devoted to the scholarly study of a particular field or discipline” (Wise & Estelle, 2022), such as The Leopoldina (Leopoldina, 2023) or French Academy of Sciences (Académie des Sciences, n.d.) could be considered knowledge bubbles which can produce high-quality knowledge.

 

Arguably, the question of whether acquisition of knowledge occurring in bubbles matters or not is irrelevant because knowledge bubbles are fluid and ever-changing. In the arts, a hybrid genre is “a combination of two or more stylistic, themed categories” (Carrier, 2023) such as black comedy, romantic comedy, ethnofiction, and horror western. Bubbles burst constantly in the arts as genres merge, forming new knowledge. Although bubbles do exist, they are capable of merging with others; thus, their existence may not matter. In the natural sciences, bubbles are also popped through hybrid fields such as neurolaw, “the intersection of neuroscience and the legal system.” (APA, n.d.). The interdisciplinary combination of areas of knowledge has evidently proven to be beneficial. In conclusion, it has been argued that acquisition of knowledge occurring in echo chambers excluding scientific experts matters and has a negative impact when it is applied to policies and impacts wider society Furthermore, when they promote knowledge founded on prejudice, knowledge bubbles can have a harmful effect. Comparatively, knowledge bubbles encouraging the collective production of knoqledge are beneficial for scientists. Alternatively, it may be argued that it makes little difference if information is acquired in bubbles because they are continually merging and dissipating in both the natural sciences and the arts.

 

However, in my opinion, it does matter that acquisition of knowledge happens in bubbles as this state of affairs has impacts on knowledge in the arts and natural sciences. Whether these impacts are mainly positive or negative is more up for debate. Personally, I believe that for the arts and natural sciences the positive impacts outweigh the negative as these two areas of knowledge rely heavily on collaboration in the production of knowledge. Although biased and prejudiced knowledge can sometimes emerge from echo chambers, with proper controls, the potential for this could be limited, creating the optimal conditions for high-quality knowledge in a flow-state to be acquired.

 

 

Académie des Sciences (no date) History of the French Académie des Sciences, History of the French Académie des sciences | Histoire de l'Académie des sciences | Nous connaître. Institut de France. Available at: https://www.academie-sciences.fr/en/Histoire-de-l-Academie-des-sciences/history-of-the-french-a cademie-des-sciences.html (Accessed: January 2, 2023).

 

APA Dictionary of Psychology (no date) American Psychological Association. American Psychological Association. Available at: -  https://dictionary.apa.org/neurolaw (Accessed: January 6, 2023).

 

Beveridge, A. (2001) “A disquieting feeling of strangeness?: The art of the mentally ill,” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 94(11), pp. 595–599. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680109401115.

 

Blue, S. (2017) What is an intentional community? - 30th birthday, Day 13, Foundation for Intentional Community. Available at: https://www.ic.org/what-is-an-intentional-community-30th-birthday-day-13/ (Accessed: January 3, 2023).

 

Brain drain (no date) Cambridge Dictionary. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/brain-drain (Accessed: January 2, 2023).

 

Carrier, T. (2023) What is a hybrid genre?, Language Humanities. Available at: https://www.languagehumanities.org/what-is-a-hybrid-genre.htm (Accessed: January 11, 2023).

 

Charmantier, I. (2020) Linnaeus and race, The Linnean Society. Available at: https://www.linnean.org/learning/who-was-linnaeus/linnaeus-and-race (Accessed: January 9, 2023). Dictionary, C. (no date) Peer Review, Cambridge Dictionary. Available at - https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/peer-review (Accessed: January 5, 2023).

 

Dubuffet, J. (1951) “Anticultural Positions.” The Arts Club of Chicago: The Arts Club of Chicago.

 

Fighting for treatment - A history of HIV care in South Africa (no date) MSF UK. Available at: https://msf.org.uk/article/fighting-treatment-history-hiv-care-south-africa (Accessed: January 5, 2023).

 

Kim, S.H., Vincent, L.C. and Goncalo, J.A. (2013) “Outside advantage - Can social rejection fuel creative thought?,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(3), pp. 605–611. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029728.

 

Leopoldina mission statement (2023) Nationale Akademie der Wissenschaften Leopoldina. Available at: https://www.leopoldina.org/en/about-us/about-the-leopoldina/leopoldina-mission-statement/ (Accessed: January 15, 2023).

 

Lübbren, N. (2001) Rural artists' colonies in Europe - 1870-1910. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

 

Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002). The concept of flow. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 89–105). Oxford University Press. Nguyen, C. (2018). Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles. Episteme. 17. 1-21. 10.1017/epi.2018.32.

 

Outsider art (2020) Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, inc. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/art/outsider-art (Accessed - January 13, 2023).

 

Roeder, A. (2014) The cost of South Africa's misguided AIDS policies, News. Available at - https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/spr09aids/ (Accessed: January 5, 2023).

 

Sidley P. (2000). Mbeki appoints team to look at cause of AIDS. The British Medical Journal (Clinical research ed.), 320(7245), 1291.

 

Smith , R.A. (2014) “Types of mankind - polygenism and scientific racism in the nineteenth century United States scientific community,” Electronic Thesis Collection, Pittsburg State University [Preprint].

 

Stanford researchers establish link between creative genius and mental illness (2002) ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily. Available at: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/05/020522073047.htm (Accessed: January 3, 2023).

 

True Meditation Is the Science of Observing Your Thoughts (no date) Big Think. Big Think. Available at: https://bigthink.com/videos/jon-kabat-zinn-on-meditation-and-thoughts-as-bubbles/ (Accessed - January 6, 2023).

 

Wade, L. (2021) A racist scientist built a collection of human skulls. should we still study them?, Science. Science.org. Available at -https://www.science.org/content/article/racist-scientist-built-collection-human-skulls-should-we-s%20till-study-them%20(Accessed:%20January%202,%202023).

 

Wise, A. and Estelle, L. (2022) Learned societies, the key to realising an open access future?, LSE. London School of Economics. Available at - https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/06/24/learned-societies-the-key-to-realising-a n-open-access-future/ (Accessed: January 7, 2023).