The past few decades have witnessed an emphasis on digital technology. References to the techno-utopian seemed to signal the possibility of social and cultural change while acknowledging a fundamental flaw. The digital technologies and its commitment to making knowledge accessible would produce the benefit and well-being of all its citizens. Those promises were partly realized but the other affordances of digital technologies did not let the techno-utopia come true. It has seen that besides letting vast knowledge accessible, digital technologies are also powerful tools designating public ignorance.
Access to volumes of knowledge does not imply the assimilation of knowledge. Philosopher Daniel R. DeNicola writes that a consequence of immediate access to enormous banks of information is valuing access to knowledge over the assimilation of knowledge. DeNicola affirms that “[assimilation] creates within the mind of the learner informational networks, conceptual connections, cognitive frameworks, and expanded moral, intellectual and artistic imagination. These aspects of the life of the mind alter our ways of speaking, acting, and responding to the world-and influence what other knowledge we might choose to "look up." In the end, access to information is only as valuable as the intelligence that selects and applies it.
This logic of “why to learn now, if it is always accessible” can be explained by Robert Pfallers 1996 concept “interpassivity”. “[...] certain behavior which consists in delegating one’s own pleasure: people who use their video recorder instead of watching tv; intellectuals who use their photocopy machine instead of reading [...]. Their replacement to whom they delegate their pleasures to function for them as interpassive media” (Pfaller 2009). Sociologist and philosopher Renata Salecl gives an alike example regarding the new digital manners: “When I download a daily planner or a fitness app I can easily continue to not do the task I planned since the app is a stand-in to which I somehow delegate the enjoyment of doing it for me“ In a similar way, people delegating the enjoyment of knowing to the machines while they relish the ignorance.
Furthermore, the preference technologies help to dwell in ignorance. Individual preferences are partly shaped by cognitive choices but mainly by the characteristics of available technologies, tools, and corporate agendas. This DeNicola addresses [preferences]: “Today, our ignorance can be sustained by "user-preference" technology. Whatever our beliefs, we may enjoy a cozy informational cocoon in which we hear only the news, opinions, music, and voices we prefer. Ideas that might challenge our views never reach us. “ DeNicola recites that the preference-driven technology creates a cognitive comfort zone and adds: “Without direct intention, we erect epistemic barriers.”
Renata Salecl questions the ignorance as a common behavior clearly visible in regard to big data or climate change. “Although people often “sign” informed consent agreements when they use self-monitoring apps or when they engage with the Internet of things and control their environment from afar, they often ignore the fact that they are allowing corporations and state surveillance apparatuses to use their data in ways that go against their interests. With the vast new knowledge that we are dealing with in these times of big data, there is a concurrent increase in the ignorance pertaining thereto.”
Ignorance is increasingly being supported by the images of today's information technology. It is vast, connected and controlling all aspects of our lives. The algorithmic governance, artificial intelligence, and expertized knowledge from art to science, to politics, and to popular culture create fear for knowing. People feel they are inferior to the vast knowledge and capacities to process it.
Salecl asserts: “People in the developed world are afraid to admit that the belief in development that underlies modern capitalism is, in fact, something that cannot last forever. People are also afraid to face the prospect that climate change might actually lead to a decline in economic growth and that any government intervention in the market through various mechanisms of controlling carbon dioxide emissions and introducing penalties for corporations might also imply loss of the idea of freedom, which for many people is related to the idea of the free market.” Ignorance and fear support each other mutually. Furthermore, knowing requires taking responsibility. “Maintaining ignorance is, then, a strategy for preserving deniability and innocence, for keeping options open, for avoiding responsibility, but also for assuring fairness and just decision.“ Salecl also points out the unjustness of our generation’s ignorance. “Prosperity is important for the current generation, something that allows this generation to live longer, healthier lives in the developed world. The problem of this generation, however, is that it has not paid the full price of this progress. The rest of the price will be charged to future generations.” (Salecl 2017)
“Ignorance refers not only to the state of not-knowing; it also designates that which we do not know. [...] ignorance has [...] intentionality: it takes an object. To be ignorant is to be ignorant of something. Objets of ignorance, like objects of knowledge, can vary enormously in scope.” 19 As Salecl referred From the big data to climate change or AI, and algorithms running all around us. DeNicola refers to the fundamental question of “who can be ignorant of what and when?”
There are things that we may know, we like to know, we need to know, we have the right to know and we have to know; as well as “not to know” respectively. While the contemporary culture of ignorance is trending and becoming an ideological stance (DeNicola), what is the ethic of ignorance in our technology-assisted ecology?
a’21 amberNetworkFestival takes its cue from the public ignorance about our technology-driven future, invites artists and theoreticians foresight into the commonplace.
Ekmel Ertan
Salecl, Renata. (2017). Ignorance in Times of Big Data. Public Square. @ publicsquare.dk retrieved on 23.11.2018
Robert Pfaller (2017) Interpassivity, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
DeNicola, R. D. (2018). Understanding Ignorance. [S.L.]: Mit Press,.