The first component of a social discourse is the body of knowledge which forms the frame of reference from which the technology of the discourse is derived. The primary repository of this body of knowledge is embodied in the jargon and special vocabulary used to communicate this knowledge. It is this body of knowledge which is studied in professional training schools such as “medical school”, “law school”, “business school”, etc.
Within these bodies of knowledge a student and practitioner can specialize and develop an expertise in some sub section of the discourse giving them even more power and authority because of their special knowledge. These folks become the “experts.”
The experts are often credentialed by some accrediting body which sanctions and validates the mastery of this specialized knowledge of the discourse. This specialized knowledge is often made visible by initials after the person’s name and basic credential. Mastering this body of knowledge gives the person authority, social status, and power among society at large but especially among those who also represent the discourse.
The language used in public discourse—whether in media, politics, or everyday conversations—frames issues and defines what is considered "truthful" or "common sense."4 For example, the use of terms like "illegal alien" instead of “undocumented” in a discourse on immigration can frame immigrants as a threat, which in turn influences people's attitudes and support for certain policies.5 This framing of knowledge can legitimize certain viewpoints while marginalizing others, creating a shared understanding that is difficult to challenge.
This specialized use of words to communicate knowledge has a way of colonizing a person’s thinking and beliefs. Some thoughts and beliefs benefit from the social sanctions wielded by the laws of the society which govern the practices of the discourse and people departing from the generally accepted meaning of the words are sued for malpractice, censured, disbarred, excommunicated, and labeled as “quacks” and con artists if not traitors and apostates.
The devious manipulation of nefarious actors cast doubt on the accuracy and validity of the discourse knowledge base. Perpetration of disinformation, propaganda, and “alternative facts” undermine and sabotage the accepted knowledge base of the discourse and change it sometimes rapidly and sometimes insidiously.
From an evolutionary perspective, the knowledge base of discourses are constantly changing and in flux based on the benefits and the accuracy of the predicted outcomes they provide.
The deeper analysis of the knowledge base of discourses occurs in the philosophical discipline of epistemology which is the study of knowledge. Epistemology attempts to investigate and understand how we know what we know and how knowledge is used in our human functioning.
How do we know if what we are told is accurate and valid? Should I believe what I am being told or not? Does the person sharing this knowledge know that they are talking about? Are they to be trusted?
It is interesting how jargon words can be weaponized and people can be attacked them. A good example is psychiatric diagnoses and various legal terms like "sex offender" and "felon." People are called diabetics and "demented" when the diagnosis becomes the main identifying characteristic of the person.
ReplyDelete