So I gave my students an assignment to read Wikipedia and the Death of the Expert and to write a short theological reflection as a blog post. Here are a couple of good ones--the first from Paul, an Aussie priest, and the second from Nhien, a Vietnamese SVD student.
WIKIPEDIA
AND FIRE
In ten seconds or less, think of 5 THINGS
ABOUT FIRE…. I bet you included something good and something dire! Hold that
thought. Names like Gutenberg, Edison and Armstrong … and labels like Industrial,
Renaissance and Modern all mark human unfolding. But fire, just think of IT. Making
IT unleashed technology, movement and
the SHARING OF STORY, like never before.
Humans now lived out of caves and over
mountain and plain, safe from beasts amidst barriers of fire. No more sent to
bed by the sun; no more confined by the day. AND SO let story tellers tell in the night ‘round the glow; let the children
ask and jostle to know; let newfound dreams such doings sow.
To glow and know … and so … Wikipedia; the
pride of some … the target of others. Good or dire? Amidst the great shifts
created by fire (yes, IT again) how
many children only learned through scalded fingers to tame and master this
vexed new power? Democratising of capacity and story; is that a way of seeing
fire? Democratising of scholarship; that’s the pride of Wiki’s friends and of proponents of democratising scholarship
through the collaborative shifts of label internet’s power. You further the fire link, but note, the dire burnt
fingers didn’t dump the development.
As theology, faith seeking understanding, searches the human story, much abounds
in human ingenuity to mark. Marshall McLuhan’s ‘the medium is the message’ reveals even theological relevance as
the collaborative scholarship of Wikipedia and similar dynamics of doing learning reveal values and
capacity. What scripture scholarship calls a corrective matrix for its interplay of research, speculation and
application, Wikipedia has remarkably established among its network of
volunteer minds, tools, administrators and arbitrators. In this is a ground upwards acknowledgement that
excellence of mind and/or process isn’t
the reserve of an elite. And Wikipedia’s levels of accuracy may imply a wider
spread human ethic of seeking the good than often presumed. This so-called
democratisation of scholarship is arguably firing a breadth of ordinary human scholarly
potential, a vote for human dignity.
Yes
indeed, for the democratisation of scholarship, the shifts enabled by the
internet’s medium invite theology’s principle of subsidiarity. Let those who properly can, do! May burnt fingers
lead us well to tame and master, not dump the dignity of such development.
The
theological implications of Wikipedia and the democratization of scholarship
Nowadays, people from different
parts of the world can get in touch easily, get to learn from each other more conveniently,
and understand the surrounding world broadly and profoundly; many mysterious
things are uncovered by so many available sources of knowledge. It’s not
because the size of the earth is getting smaller, but because of the enormous
contributions of the technology of communication to the world today.
One of the most recognizable
impacts of technology that Maria Bustillos discussed in her article, Wikipedia and The Death of The Expert,
is the usage of Wikipedia as well as its contributions to academic studies and
to the spirit of collaboration among good writers. Apparently, Wikipedia not only brings its own
advantages that offer rich and comprehensive sources of materials for doing
research or necessary studies, but also plays the role of a bridge to connect
oneself to the outside world, of a kind of “machine” to break through the shell
of oneself to reach out to others, and also of the public entry, where all
voices are welcome to contribute their thoughts and ideas to enrich the world
of knowledge and information. As David
Lochhead comments on the work of McLuhan in a very spiritual and theological
sense, “We take our technology into the deepest recesses of our souls. Our view
of reality, our structures of meaning, our sense of identity—all are touched
and transformed by the technologies which we have allowed to mediate between
ourselves and our world.” Experiencing
what is going on in the surrounding world, deepening the meaning of everything,
and knowing the identity of oneself through the technology of Wikipedia are possible
sources of theological implications
recognized behind the rich source materials of Wikipedia. Other than that, Wikipedia allows other
voices to be heard in contributing their talents and capability to the progression
of literature in the field. It shows a
great collaboration among writers, who are also great
thinkers. In a similar vein, Melody McMahon contributes an interesting point in
her article, Wikipedia and
Democratization of Scholarship that, “The collaboration can go even further
and maybe the time for rapprochement between ‘professional scholars’ and ‘amateur
scholars’ has come.”
Besides all the
advantages that the technology of Wikipedia has contributed to the world of
knowledge, the growth of a human person in knowing oneself and the outside
world, and the “charity” in allowing other voices to be heard are the great
theological implications of Wikipedia and democratization of scholarship.
