Pleasures of Reading: All about Knowledge
by Ritch Calvin
Sometimes, readings students’ writing feel like drudgery; sometimes, it is such a pleasure.
So, for the past 6 months, or so, I have been heavily steeped in reading epistemology.
If you have followed me at all, that shouldn’t be surprising. After all, my 2016 book was titled: Feminist Science Fiction and Feminist Epistemology; it’s right there in the title. Further, I wrote about epistemology in Pleasures of Reading 2022 edition.
However, in my previous encounters, I had been heavily focused on Western epistemology. I’d read Aristotle and Plato, Descartes and Quine, Locke and Hume, etc., etc.
But in early 2025, I was asked to teach a revamped class for the Honors College called a History of Human Understanding. I was provided with a few sample syllabi, and I said “No thanks” to that. Those syllabi, too, were completely focused on Western epistemology. I informed the Honors College that, if I were to teach the class, it would include much more diverse readings. They said, “Fantastic!”
And the great read-a-thon began.
I spent Spring and Summer prepping for the class and trying to wrestle (a nod to Plato) a syllabus into shape. So much to cover. So many false starts. So many discarded attempts.
In the end, we did read four texts from the Western tradition.
Beyond that, we read Chinese epistemology, Indian epistemology, African epistemology, African diaspora epistemology, Native American epistemology, indigenous epistemology, feminist epistemology, queer epistemology, trans epistemology, epistemology and science, epistemology and democracy, epistemology and medicine, epistemology and fake news.
Many of you will note that most of the epistemologies mentioned are vast and complex. Indeed, they are. We could have spent the entire semester on any one of them. But we did discuss that problem and what it means to reduce an entire culture to a few “representative” texts. It is the very nature of introductory level courses.
One of the things that students noticed and discussed (frequently) was the fact that the Western epistemological tradition (or at least some of it) centers on the individual knower. In Plato’s Theaetetus, it is a question of whether or not Theaetetus can know anything or not. In Descartes’s Meditations, he distrusts his senses and all those around him, and he retreats into his own mind. Only what he as an individual thinks is knowledge.
On the other hand, the non-Western epistemologies see knowledge as both a communal effort and a relative thing. The knowledge is produced by all the individuals—across generations—and is handed down and shared. As such, they are less interested in universal Truths and more interested in what is relevant for their own existence. They recognize that what may be true for their community might not be true for another community.
Furthermore, the vast majority of my students were taken by the lower-case truths of community-based knowledge. At the same time, they were largely flummoxed by the idea that these small communities were perfectly content with the “stagnation” and were not motivated by “progress.” Nevertheless, they seemed to take comfort in the idea of knowledge as a communal project.
And then we turned to generative AI. (Ah, there is already so much to read about AI!) We read about how large language models (LLMS) work—and don’t. Whether what AIs produce is “knowledge”—or not. And about the ways in which LLMs replicate the marginalizations and biases that we already see in society. We also tried out a few AIs in class to see how useful they were as a learning tool. Almost to a person, they rejected the AIs we used. They did not think they were useful (except maybe to create study guides). They believed that what the AIs produced was meaningless unless they had already read the source material.
And the students were so enthusiastic. For one, they loved the fact that the class did not focus on Western thought. They were already well aware of the Western tradition (or so they thought). For another, they were eager to read an expansive history of epistemology. Many noted how refreshing it was to read something from their own culture. And finally, they were eager to see some of the ways in which it directly impacts their own lives.
As I am writing this essay, I am bouncing back and forth between writing this reflection and grading the final essays from the class. And I have to say, reading these 24 essays written by 18-year-olds is the real pleasure of reading. These final essays by this group of first-year college students have been fantastic.
For their essay, they were asked to consider the long tradition of knowledge as the product of an individual and the long tradition of knowledge as a product of a community. Finally, they were asked to consider how the emergence of generative AI supported or undermined those two traditions. What does knowledge consist of today?
They examine both the pros and cons of Western epistemological models. They examine the pros and cons of non-Western epistemological traditions. They’re thoughtful, and articulate, and engaged.
And then they turn to what AI has wrought.
The results are both devastating and heartening. They engage with these ideas in meaningful ways. They recognize the importance of these questions. And they are grappling with the role of these new tools in their lives.
It is science-fictional thinking of the first order, and the task has been a complete pleasure.
No comments:
Post a Comment