(KNW1b) Sociology of Knowledge II: Actors and Structures of Knowledge

The sociology of knowledge explores the creation and representation of reality and social life, including organizational, practical, historical, cultural, and embodied knowledge, as well as beliefs, myths, facts, customs, routines, identities, and more. This session explores how knowledge actors and practices shape social structures and beliefs in societies. Papers explore the role of academics, politicians, governments, and researchers in shaping both the content of knowledge, and organizational structures and practices that reify knowledge. Tags: Communautés, Connaissances, Culture, Théorie

Organizers: Lily Ivanova, University of British Columbia, Anastasia Kulpa, University of Alberta/Concordia University of Edmonton, Alvin Yang, York University; Chairs: Lily Ivanova, University of British Columbia, Anastasia Kulpa, University of Alberta/Concordia University of Edmonton

Presentations

nob doran, University of New Brunswick

Learning from 5 year old Joanne: Linguistic lessons for theorists, methodologists and activists

This paper (an extract from `doran, nob {forthcoming} “Codifying Parrhesian Bodies”, Oxford: Routledge’) examines the contributions to social science that can be gained by synthesizing the Millerian approach to ‘Femenist Discourse analysis’ with the Foucauldian perspective on ‘power’, and applying it to the ‘ordinary language’ of underdogs, like 5 year old Joanne. Specifically, it will allow us to see the importance, in mundane interaction, of having a ‘macro cultural discourse’ with which to resist a ‘dominant discourse’. These insights are then used to inform current debates about standpoint theory and qualitative methodology (Smith and Griffin 2022), reflexivity (Onishenko, Doran, Torres and Nyaga 2023) and social/theoretical activism (Collins 2019). The paper finishes by suggesting the need to go beyond Miller’s ‘standpoint’ of the strategic ‘Underdog’; and  proposes, instead, Foucault’s final concept of ‘parrhesia’ (Doran 2015, 2023) so as to forge a “parrhesian underdog standpoint”.

Charlotte Nell, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena

The referee's fear of the 'VAR' - A micro-analysis of the transformation of the praxis of refereeing

In this paper, we examine the use of the VAR (video-assistant-referee) in German soccer from a sociological-phenomenological perspective. We analyze the transformation of the praxis of refereeing before the background of broader social processes of digitalization and parametrization. Despite the argument that soccer is a game that transcends the workings of everyday life, we nonetheless argue that through an analysis of the transformation of the role and function of the referee, a logic of “parametric optimization” that is paradigmatic for late-modern culture can be uncovered. In a first step, we analyze the tasks of an idealtypically constructed “On-Field-Referee” who in his role resembles that of a “hermeneutic conductor”. From this sociology of knowledge perspective, the soccer match is considered a complex ‘situation’ where the field referee must deal with a variety of tasks but is also confronted with blind spots in his judgmental capacity. In contrast to the “hermeneutic conductor”, we will reconstruct the VAR’s role that resembles that of a “parametric accountant”. From a phenomenological perspective, this change reflects a transformation of “situations” into “constellations”, followed by an overemphasis on meticulous rule compliance. This, we argue, ultimately turns the decision-making process into a black box. In this way, the VAR not only delegitimizes the on-field referee but contributes to a process of “structured irresponsibility” on the pitch. The process of parametrization described here is, however, not only restricted to the soccer pitch. The gradual transformation of ‘situations’ into ‘constellations’ rather can be considered as symptomatic of late-modern culture altogether. Hence, the “parametric optimization” follows a logic that aims to guide the moral judgments of the referee by empirical and measurable experience alone. The question of what is right, nonetheless entails an ethical dimension that cannot be answered based on empirical data alone but requires moral judgment. The moral judgment of the “On-Field-referee” however becomes delegitimized and discouraged in the process of digitalization. The analysis presented here of the figure of the referee hence reflects changes in the understanding of the meaning of ‘impartiality’, ‘neutrality’, and objectivity under the conditions of ‘constellationism’. Finally, it is possible to use this framework to look more precisely at the emotional aspects of the game in the fan area. Soccer is a good example of how "negative" emotions such as anger or hatred can occur alongside positive emotions. In our presentation, we argue that changes in emotional reactions can be observed depending on the altered role of the referee. Initially, it may appear that the aggressive emotion of hate, directed towards the On-Field-Referee in the event of an (apparent) incorrect decision, transforms into a less controlled and situational emotion of anger with the implementation of the Video Assistant Referee (VAR). This transformation at first seems to lead to a form of "protection" of the On-Field Referee. However, it can be argued that other emotions such as despite or disgust prevail and invectivities persist or even intensify. Consequently, the focus of anger during a game (no longer) revolves around a specific referee in a given situation but is rather transformed into a general disposition of anger towards any referee who now is perceived merely as a "function" within a broader VAR-network. This new quality of anger even holds a unifying potential of forging new alliances between opposing fan bases, previously inconceivable, albeit at the cost of the legitimacy and safety of the referee – who systematically and regardless of their performance runs the risk of becoming the most hated person in the stadium.

---

Non-presenting author: Diana Lindner, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena

Neil McLaughlin, McMaster University

Bernie's Blinders: How the structure of the higher education system in the United States shapes left ideas

The American higher education system is unique, structured as it is by the dominance of elite private institutions that are subsidized by the public because of their non-profit charity tax status. The American Left, including Bernie Sanders, wishes to raise income taxes on the corporate elite, raise the cap on social security so that the upper middle class and wealthy pay more, raise property taxes to fund schools and social services and use the tax system to address climate change but practically no-one on the American Left, including Bernie, wishes to make elite private colleges pay property taxes, endowment taxes and sales taxes. Why? This paper draws on the comparative historical sociology on American exceptionalism, the sociology of higher education, the sociology of knowledge and Erich Fromm’s notion of the “social filter” to theorize why the idea of taxing elite private colleges in the United States is a conservative and Republican project not a left-liberal project, something that makes little sense when one looks at the ideas of the left outside of America. 

Manuel Vallee, University of Auckland

Managing Uncomfortable Knowledge about Pesticides: New Zealand's handling of Glyphosate Information

The knowledge that a population possesses will significantly mediate their resistance to environmental injustices. For instance, if people are aware of the harmfulness of pesticides applied in public parks, they will be more likely to organize and pressure politicians to create laws that will curb or perhaps even ban the application of such pesticides on public lands, as has occurred in Montréal. On the other hand, if they are unaware of the pesticide’s harmfulness, they are less likely to be concerned about it or oppose it. This points to the fact some knowledge is inconvenient to those in power, and that such individuals have a vested interest to manage uncomfortable knowledge. As demonstrated by previous scholarship, one way of doing so is through the active production of non-knowledge (also referred to as ignorance), which can be cultivated by actively suppressing the production of knowledge that might be inconvenient, which some scholars refer to as undone science. For example, in the case of pesticides, manufacturers and government agencies can impede the allocation of public funding for research that might reveal the pesticide’s harmfulness. The scholarship also shows that when the production of uncomfortable knowledge can’t be suppressed, suppressing its release becomes another way of managing it. As Peter Galison (2008) emphasizes, censorship and designating something as “classified” are extremely effective strategies to suppress the emergence of potentially uncomfortable knowledge. Neutralization is another management strategy identified by previous scholarship. When the release of uncomfortable knowledge can’t be suppressed, those in power will often seek to neutralize its impact through denial, downplaying, and distraction. Drawing on the previous scholarship about uncomfortable knowledge, this paper will analyse the way government agencies manage uncomfortable knowledge about pesticides. Towards that end, I focused on the New Zealand government’s production of knowledge about Monsanto’s glyphosate herbicide. This herbicide makes for a remarkable case to study. While the United Nations’ International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as a group 2A carcinogen in 2015, it has since become the world’s best-selling herbicide. New Zealand is also a strategic case selection. While the country regularly presents itself as being environmentally responsible, its restrictions on glyphosate are comparatively low and its use comparatively high. Moreover, in Auckland (i.e. New Zealand’s largest city) the herbicide is regularly applied to roadways, sidewalks, parks and sports fields. This paper will trace the country’s use of glyphosate to the system of knowledge government agencies have produced about the herbicide. Towards that end the paper will identify the tactics government agents have used, which will include interfering with the production and dissemination of uncomfortable knowledge about glyphosate. As well, based on a content analysis of their communications campaign (which will include press releases, quotes in the media, and other means of communication) about glyphosate, the paper will identify the tactics they have used to neutralise uncomfortable knowledge that couldn’t be suppressed, which will include denial, downplaying and distraction tactics. This paper will contribute to this session on knowledge by drawing attention to both the important concept of uncomfortable knowledge, and how such knowledge is managed by government agencies. Further, it contributes to the conference theme by revealing processes through which powerful entities facilitate environmental harm, knowledge that can help communities build a more sustainable shared future.