How A Socially Constructed Knowledge System

Social Construction of Race, Class, Gender and other forms of Social Difference This paper explains how race, class and gender are referred to as aspects of social construction, and how they can impact the society. Social construction is basically a theory of knowledge that scrutinizes the advance of mutually created understandings of the world forming the basis for collective suppositions about reality. The theory asserts the fact that human beings justify their experience by forming representations of the societal world and share these representations through language (Greco, 2013). It concerns the meanings placed on objects or events by the society, which are latter embraced by the occupants of that society with special considerations on

The concept of the learning disability is relatively new, having been constructed identified within the past fifty to sixty years (Sleeter, 2010). Surprisingly, the construct of the learning disability hinges upon creation of an ideological standard of normal; the implicit assumption that we as educators know what constitutes right or normal attitudes or behavior, and that anything which falls outside of normal is a potential disability (Sleeter, 2010). These are unproven assumptions, rather than empirical, data-driven fact, and form the backbone for current definition, assessment, and interventional methods (Sleeter, 2010).

This essay contains discussions and arguments that will present the argument for the idea that age is socially constructed. Using studies that cover a myriad of situations and examples such as post-war youth movements, cultural hegemony, media influence, feminism, demonisation of as key aspects ascertaining evidence. Also, consideration has been made into the industrialisation of Asian societies, which is used to draw comparisons between both societies and the similarities in treatment towards older generations. A brief psychological argument against the social construction of age has also been included, revealing an epidemiological perspective containing a variety of factors that present an individualistic, biological explanation for age.

Human beings often observe their environment and view individual and group behaviors in ways that align with their specific understanding of the world around them. This point was deliberated on in the article by Frank and Gilovich (1988). The article focused

In many cultures the common idea is that there are girls and there are boys and they are expected to follow rules that define them. This is the idea of there being binary genders. The idea of there being more than these two set genders is not new but has only recently gained acceptance in a large portion of the world. However, that’s because these defining rules are part of a social construction. It is simply the way we are expected to do gender and we are shown how to through our socialization with our peers and family or even school and media. Though once we stop or do

203). This intricate schema defines for Knight the problem of social-based knowledge. (Darryl, 2010, p.4)

All in all, the health of any society can be directly connected to the level at which its members gather and decipher information. Perhaps what’s most interesting is that the effects of reasoning—whether good or bad—are seen everywhere from the most micro to the most macro of situations. “People who hold different worldviews often clash on a personal level, but when cultures or nations have conflicting worldviews, they can create tension and spark antagonism internationally … Examining worldviews allows us to take control of our lives by actively sorting out our fundamental beliefs, testing them against ideas and information that point to conclusions contrary to what we already believe, and making whatever revisions are indicated in the light of what we have learned”

Shared knowledge shapes personal knowledge to a great extent, in terms of provoking an emotional response through one’s agreement or disagreement, which then

Using Systems Theory to Understand How Sun Tzu Predictably Turned Concubines into Soldiers in Ancient China; and How Chaos Theory Explains Why Systems Are Ultimately Unpredictable Even When They Are Otherwise Understood

After reading the Freire’s and Foer’s articles, I stopped for a second and thought, some concepts in the world that I think is planned, while some do not, to achieve certain goals is a reality. Meaning, most of the concept that people apply in any field are justified and backed up with reasons. Convention has to take place. These reasons could be set up from people who are in charge of the educational or the political system. One of these systems is demanding the public to think and act in the best interest of itself. Of course, the interests could vary. Thus, the factor that helps these systems to do their job is the human’s nature of mind. The simplest form to describe it is to say this nature is like filter that will allow the important information to go through the human mind. If the people want to free themselves from whatever concept’s filter, they have to train themselves to build their own filters. The most efficient way to build it is by knowing one thing about everything. Knowing one thing about everything is the best way of education, because knowing one thing about everything will allow anybody to build a web in his or her mind that will catch all of information he or she desires.

theories and the underlying processes have a huge bearing on the subject. These psychological theories are more than theoretical in nature and can thus be applied practically. Indeed, through these theories, there is a growing belief that human behavior can be predicted using certain environmental factors. As psychologists continue to inquire more into human behavior, it becomes clearer than certain aspect of the social, biological, psychosocial, and technological environments have the biggest sway on people’s choice of actions. Often, human beings participate in a task because of the value they will derive from it, especially in terms of its economic and social importance. Social cognitive theory is of the thought that what a person perceives as right and its significance influences a course of action. A person’s behavior is greatly influenced by what he or she believes to be right or wrong. Most importantly, their actions are influenced by the benefits they accrue from them. For this reason, the subjective probabilities that affect the choice of actions can be used to determine a person’s next actions and ultimately, their behavior. In his theory, Rotter explains that learning and cognitive processes combine to determine people’s reactions to occurrences in life. Through Rotter’s social learning theory, behavior can be predicted using people’s responses to life’s occurrences. The social cognitive approach focuses on the crucial nature of cognitive processes in the

Shared knowledge and personal knowledge, although they may come from the same concept of acquiring them through a variety of situations, it differs on the process of gaining them. Thereupon, such approach is seen through human sciences and natural sciences. Human sciences portray shared knowledge through socio-psychological experiments and theories created from personal experiences and circumstances, as well as a set of collective norms and values that change depending on a group of society or culture. On the other hand, natural sciences are made up of theories, formulation of hypothesis and through experiments; which are obtained from paradigm shifts where it involves perception, reasoning, language, and memory. But how does shared knowledge and personal knowledge differ or are similar in both natural and human sciences?

Behaviors are fairly different and are free from social infuluence, where shared knowledge will hahve no impact on personal knoewledge. Personal knowledge is all defined by personal experiences and thoughts. However, these thoughts usually occur because of shared knowledge. It can further be argued that shared knowledge will always play a larger role in impacting personal knowledge. This idea will be explored through Natural Sciences and the Arts. Further investigations will be taken to prove how shared knowledge shapes personal knowledge. The knowledge question is to what extent can shared knowledge shape personal knowledge? Shared knowledge is influenced by society, rather than individiual thought. As individuals if we accept shared knowledge are we also accepting an external objective reality? This question will also be explored through the two areas of

However, as Gregory (2002) argues, it should be noted that such knowledge, be it implicit or explicit, is shared by the members of a social group “by way of their discourses”; and therefore “the pattern of their knowledge is observable and so describable, and this caters too for what is pertinent about an individual’s knowledge” (Gregory, 2002, p. 16).

Acquired knowledge people use to interpret experience and actions. This knowledge then influence values ,attitude and behavior