Access to Specialised Knowledge Makes Decision-Making Easier in Contemporary Society - Essay Example

Topic: "Access to specialised knowledge makes decision-making easier in contemporary society" Discuss using examples of medical, religious and environmental knowledge. Essay needs to reflect how access to specialised knowledge can make decision making both easier and harder. The arguments will need to refer to the social science theories of the 1) knowledge society 2) consumer society 3) risk society The emergence of information technology as well as the development in economics, science and medicine has made it possible for societies to easily access specialised knowledge essential for decision-making. The individual, the community and the social and political hierarchy that constitute the system, now face new risks brought forth by the choices they have to make or will make in the future. This is a result of the deluge of information, the flooding of goods in a free market economy and the proliferation of environmental and scientific awareness that conflict with other pieces of information, alternative goods and concepts that are readily available at a flick of a finger. These aforementioned conveniences and awareness are sometimes deemed liabilities in contemporary society as access to specialized knowledge and the profound understanding of risks have deemed it difficult for societies to formulate institutional and collective decisions. However, individuals, with their predilection for personal control, are in some ways encouraged by consumerism and their ability to purchase and thus, decision-making can easily be generated in the personal level. The present transition of societies from industrial to knowledge societies has significantly affected not just individuals but also the economy and our political structure as well. With the societies' and the individual's volume of knowledge at the effortless disposal increasing at a high-speed rate and doubling every five years, the rise of the new social order founded on knowledge is inevitable (Stehr, 2001). The swift metamorphosis that our society will undergo in the near future will affect our politics and our democratic ideals. Nico Stehr asserts that knowledge is not just a 'constitutive' factor of the market economy but a fundamental 'organisational principle' upon which we base our very existence - even our way of life (2001). Living in a knowledge society only means that we systematize our social and political structures on the basis of what we know. This has significant implications in that knowledge and technology have freed us from the clutches of religious, military and monarchic hegemony - monolithic institutions which are now considered obsolete. However, it is important to note that the political system's regulation of social circumstances, involving mainly careful planning, controlling, managing and forecasting of the aforesaid social conditions, has increasingly become difficult as society has faced fragility. This is not brought about by the emergence of the global culture and economy or the 'economisation' of social relations but the disappearance of political power in the face of increasing knowledge. The rise of a more hierarchal society which sprang from the attainment of knowledge has become more noticeable in more liberal democratic states as equality of knowledge of complex issues plaguing many democracies around the world is necessary for political legitimacy - one which arises from democratic participation (Teune et al, 2001). The key concept that most citizens consider is the legitimacy of the hierarchy in the political realm which could not be achieved unless democratic participation is encouraged and effected. For democracy to work, the surfacing of the informed citizenry which is passionately involved in participatory democracy is necessary. Understanding of these complex issues, however, requires the use of knowledge, and with the shaping of the general public to a robust knowledge society, differences and conflicts in opinion and ideas usually hampers the swift promulgation of policies that are necessary for the improvement of those who needed it. For instance, the rise of cause-oriented groups which identify with a plethora of complex issues with regards the environment could either speed up or hinder the formulation of an important environmental policy. But what exactly are the connotations of a knowledge society Lyon and Stehr define knowledge as 'capacity to act' and the probability to be able to 'start something going' (Stehr 2001). Peter Drucker (1993) affirms this position when he asserts that knowledge in contemporary society 'must prove itself in action' which is information that delineates results. This implies that scientific or technical knowledge is the facility to effect action. Daniel Bell (1990) in his seminal work 'The Coming of Post Industrial Society' makes parallel assertions as he contends that the role of technology in driving social change is significant, and central to it is the importance of knowledge in effecting innovations and the formation of technological transformation. On the other hand, Stehr holds that scientific and technical understanding in society does not imply that scientific inventions and concepts are considered absolute truth, always credible or objective by the populace but rather this form of understanding fashion opportunities which the individual can act upon (2001). Hence, scientific theories and data are often subjected to disputations resulting to the loss of their practical significance as scientific information must be conclusive in order for it to be relevant in a knowledge society. The implications of this contemporary phenomenon are massive in that knowledge society creates a 'fragile social systems' as a consequence of the individual's proclivity for action. The influence and control of significant institutions are undermined and substituted by those of smaller groups which have the penchant for action and influence. Stehr employs the term 'fragile' in order to emphasise the decline of capacity of powerful institutions to control society and foresee developments. Drucker further asserts this as the shift towards knowledge has structured and shaped a novel social order (1993) where the decline in influence of the 'authority' has further made it difficult for institutions, corporations and policy-makers to affect positive change or to make important decisions (Stehr 2001). With this transformation of society - from industrial and skilled to knowledge and specialised - come new risks - a consequence of this knowledge. Ulrich Beck (1991) in his book 'Risk Society' asserts that we live in a period of transition he termed as 'risk society' where decision-making has become more challenging as a consequence of the confrontation between traditions and modernity. As we exist in the era of transition, a period in which property and power relationships have embraced modernity, we are also confronted by the old which he referred to as 'reflexive modernisation' (Beck, 1991, Beck et al. 2003). The dissolution of the industrial society and the transformation to modernity and currently, knowledge society can be typified as 'risk society' in that new kinds of global risks and threats that remain unknown in traditional societies have been instituted by our achievements in technology, economy, medicine and other various areas in science. Beck further argues that the late modern society face more risks such as threats that arise from our environmental problems as well as other risks that emerge from modernisation. This results to more social problems which in turn foster awareness on individuals, engaging them to effectively handle these threats. This consciousness of risks results to the 'uncertainty of knowledge' coalesced with more pronounced individualisation of persons as they become more reflexive, increasing their engagement in transforming policies and regulations. 'Reflexive modernisation' the conflict between tradition and modernity has resulted to prudent decision-making thus, implying that the new risks Beck alludes to have the capacity to transform society, making an aware individual more politically involved. What is interesting to note in Beck's contentions is that, he asserts the participation of individuals in politics and in the transformation of policies - further cementing Stehr's assertions that power politics is spurred by the knowledge society and the individuals who have access to specialised information. Beck asserts that these members of the society will create new social movements which he describes as 'sub-politics'- movements he predicts to be important factors of transformation in politics (1991). The emphasis on individualisation, especially institutionalised individualism, a concept which contends that individuals alone are responsible for their lives (Beck, 1992; Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, 2002) however, according to Beck, results to 'reflexivity' of persons in society especially if this individualisation is combined with the globalisation of economy, culture, communication and risks. The globalisation of risks results to the disappearance of national territorial boundaries (Beck 2002a) as individuals, communities and groups begin to interrelate globally, producing a 'global society within the local context' (Beck 2000, 2002a and Giddens 2002). As the technology made travelling and migrating over long distances easy and convenient, the heterogeneity of states and nations have been augmented producing 'transnational people'. With the development and utilization of communications technology, satellite television and the Internet, transnational individuals have become aware of other geographical and cultural spheres, fostering on them acceptance and respect of others' cultural differences (Beck 2004). The implications of 'transnationalisation' and awareness of risks, however, have considerable implications on collective and institutional decision-making on the local level. Our global environmental concerns for instance, such as the amount of carbon emission that a territory produces undergoes global scrutiny. The refusal of the Bush government to sign the Kyoto Protocol had elicited international and local protestations that the issue became central in the Bush's government's agenda. The difficulty and failure of the US government in generating key decisions with regards global issues such as the environment and carbon emission has become a vital issue during the Obama campaign. Obama's election as America's president only manifests that failure to decide 'reasonably' on the issue of global importance has negative consequences, at least on the Republican Party. The knowledge of risks has also enhanced our awareness of medical development and threats. The current 'Swineflu' scare, which could approach pandemic proportions, has alarmed local authorities all over the world. Yet, the policy formulation to avoid the pandemic cannot be instituted easily as nations in every part of the world find it difficult to contain travels, migration and exchange. In Mexico where the virus has originated, local authorities effected containment of businesses and populations, as they shut down schools and commercial activities. In a global economy, suppression of business activities has adverse repercussions and it will not just Mexico which will suffer from the consequences. The idea of global 'business as usual' where business persons cross boundaries devoid of constraint is alarming in that it increases risks of the proliferation of the illness in every corner of the world. Yet, the idea of shutting global business and commerce poses a bigger threat to a society driven by and dependent on consumer goods. If policy formulation and decision-making in the collective and institutional sense have made it difficult for policy-makers and local authorities to promulgate, decision-making in the personal level, even though individuals are aware of risks, does not move in a parallel direction as in the organizational policy and decision-making. Although Beck argues and predicts that the switch towards globalization and individualization creates awareness and engagement among the population with regards 'new risks' - sometimes referred to as reflexivity, few studies have affirmed these contentions. Lupton and Tulloch (2001) conducted an empirical investigation of Beck's thesis based on their qualitative interviews on 74 Australians. Their research illustrates that people are conscious of risks and are reflexive with regards them. However, they do not treat global and transnational risks as 'new risks' but rather treat them as part of their everyday lives, depicting that 'personal' risks carry more weight as compared to risks on people in general. Hence, Lupton and Tulloch contend that Beck's reflexivity thesis can be affirmed when individuals make 'personal judgments' but not when it concerns assertions of risks in a general sense (2002). The interviewees were not able to relate to risks mentioned by Beck but on the contrary, to risks correlated with their local circumstances and within the context of their personal lives which include problems related to health, employment and personal finances (Lupton, Tulloch 2002). This confirms Beck's theory of risks in that people are in fact highly aware of them and which they attempt to manage in a 'reflexive' means. However, the research does not suggest the confirmation of the 'global awareness' hypothesis as the individuals who were interviewed include mainly local and national risks instead of global ones (Lupton and Tulloch 2001). This study is further backed by another Australian research which provides significant details with regards the individual's knowledge of new risks. Gow and Leahy (2005) surveyed individuals and asked them with regards the possibility of the occurrence of various apocalyptic scenarios. Results of the survey illustrate that the respondents are aware of future catastrophes but do not show concern of the threats or how to provide solutions for them. This seems to show that people can be apathetic with regards new government regulations or institutional policy. But are these findings sufficient to assert that individuals are more concerned about personal motives and are essentially influenced and driven by the consumerism and the culture that arose with it It is quite apparent that consumers, barraged with plethora of products and manipulative advertising, undermined the efficient utilization of information in the knowledge society and in the global market economy. Journalist Robert Millar regarded the majority of consumers as 'gullible and irrational prey to the seductions of advertisers' contending that consumers should be more demanding and critical in their choices as these traits results to the improvement of standards in quality (Millar in Gurney 2005). It is quite significant to note that swift and ease of decision-making are usually applied by individuals in their purchasing behavior of consumption goods while the trace of risk awareness, knowledge of science and technology dissipates. Cohen (2003), however argues, although consumers do not appear to be aware of risks that products could bring forth, they continue to play a significant role in structuring capitalism and the material and political aspects that are shaped because of it. She emphasizes the power of the consumers as enablers of corporations but at the same time a collective and powerful entity that can go against producers, multinationals and global consumer culture. She cites the growing McDonald's chain of stores in China where the restaurant introduced innovations to cater to the preferences of the locals. Cohen affirms the forecast of the Economist Magazine that consumers will eventually turn to 'niche outlets' of goods producers which 'offer more than just a wide variety.' This implies that consumers still have the influence on companies on what products are preferential rather than the other way around. The advent of online purchasing and the readily available product information for consumers over the internet have made it possible for companies to 'tailor their promotions' and products in accord with the customers' inclinations (Cohen 2003). The result of this assault on consumers is quite striking as individuals are categorically impulsive when products suit their wants and their purchasing power. This only implies that people, when confronted with the dilemma to decide on a personal level make hasty decisions when consumer goods have considerable effect on their status symbol. It is then safe to assume that what drives consumers to make immediate choices is their awareness of the contemporary society in which class distinctions, gender roles and stereotypes have vanished and hence, anyone who holds the power to purchase can avail of goods that used to be difficult to acquire. Notable also is the conscious disregard of environmental and health risks that result from the consumption of some goods. The idea of the individual as a pleasure seeker and driven by consumer goods is an irregularity in the light of Beck's pronouncements about 'reflexive' individuals in the knowledge society. Hence, what do we make of this seemingly anomalous human behavior How do we reconcile these irregularities Studies conducted by Olofsson and Ohman (2007) in Sweden have suggested that grouping individuals into dimensions, as for instance, categorizing individuals into rural, urban and migrant groupings could shed light to the thesis presented by Beck. Olofsson and Ohman assert that rural and migrant groups expressed the need for personal control supporting traditional values. These are the individuals whose lives are entrenched in the spatial everyday context. The rural or modern is marked by global values and awareness. Thus, they are not contained in a geographical location and are individualistic in nature. These contentions imply that the context of the dimensions which individuals base their views upon has significant impact in their decision-making approach as each individual has varied perception of new risks resulting to the diversity in their coping strategies. Moreover, this only affirms that the individual's decision-making strategy is less arduously generated as compared to the decisions that institutions have to create. This especially true if a member of a community has to make decisions regarding threats that confront him personally or regarding occurrences that pose risks to his way of life and basic values (Olofsson and Ohman 2007). In addition, the concept that individuals are central to the composition of society cannot be discounted in that many of the issues that the individuals confront and treat as 'personal' are similar issues that confront other individuals in the society. The institutionalisation of an increment in taxation of wage earners affect individuals in the personal level as this curtails the group's purchasing power. The problem calls for participation and thus, collective action and awareness are necessary in order for a group to resolve dilemmas such as the aforementioned. It should also be remembered that many of the policies promulgated by institutions and the government affect many members of the society personally. Beck's critics contend that individuals can be apathetic to new governmental policies and regulations and this means that people are not fully aware of new risks or are hesitant to engage in an action even if the policies adversely affect on them. This argument however rests on a flimsy foundation as societies in the West and other nations which embrace liberal democracy have switched to representative democracy in which participation is indirect but where the formulation of policies have become more efficient. Many of the studies that argued against Beck's thesis have neglected to include as significant factors the type of politics and the kind of regime a country is under. The new type of democratic ideal has limited participation yet eliminates hindrances, lengthy debates, expensive surveys, referendums and polling systems in the formulation of significant policies and institutional regulations. The involvement of an individual to select a leader and interests groups that could represent her views is enough participation in decision-making necessary to confront new risks. A new problem nonetheless, arises as decision-making has become more difficult for representatives and groups who cannot defy the wishes of the majority of their constituents. On the contrary, this results to relative ease of individuals in producing decisions. Hence, the difficulties in institutional policy-making cannot be deemed unfair as leaders and representatives have agreed to undertake responsibilities that could help individuals in society better their lives. Individuals may find it easy to make decision at times with regards risks and choices but they also have their share of different tasks to confront and act upon - and one of this is to accumulate knowledge in order to survive in a changing society. BIBLIOGRAPHY Beck, U. (1991) Risk society. Towards a new modernisation (London: Sage). Beck, U. (1994) The reinvention of politics: Towards a theory of reflexive modernization, in: U. Beck, A. Giddens & S. Lash (Eds) Reflexive modernization. Politics, traditions and aesthetics in the modern social order (Cambridge: Polity Press). Beck, U. (2000) The cosmopolitan perspective: Sociology of the second age of modernity, British Journal of Sociology, 51(1), pp. 79-105. Beck, U. (2002a) The cosmopolitan society and its enemies, Theory, Culture & Society, 19(1-2), pp. 17-44. Beck, U. (2003) Toward a new critical theory with a cosmopolitan intent, Constellations, 10(4), pp.453-468. Beck, U. (2004) Cosmopolitical realism: On the distinction between cosmopolitanism in philosophy and the social sciences, Global Networks, 4(2), pp. 131-156. Beck, U. and Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002) Individualization (London: Sage). Bell, D. (1973) The Coming of Post-Industrial Society, London, Heinneman Cohen, L. (2003) A Consumers' Republic: The Politics of Mass Consumption in Postwar America (New York). Drucker, P. (1993, Spring93). The rise of the knowledge society. Wilson Quarterly, 17(2), 52. Giddens, A. (2002) Runaway world. How globalisation is reshaping our lives (London: Profile Books). Gow, J. and Leahy, T. (2005) Apocalypse probably. Agency and environmental risk in the Hunter region, Journal of Sociology, 41(2), pp. 117-141. Gurney, P. (2005, December). The Battle of the Consumer in Postwar Britain.. Journal of Modern History, 77(4), 956-987. Lupton, D. and Tulloch, J. (2001) Border crossings: Narratives of movement, 'home' and risk, Sociological Research Online, 5(4). Available at: www.socresonline.org.uk/5/lupton.html Lupton, D. and Tulloch, J. (2002) Risk is part of your life: Risk epistemologies among a group of Australians, Sociology, 36(2), pp. 317-334. Olofsson, A., & hman, S. (2007, March). Views of Risk in Sweden: Global Fatalism and Local Control - An Empirical Investigation of Ulrich Beck's Theory of New Risks. Journal of Risk Research, 10(2), 177-196. Stehr, N. (2001, November). A WORLD MADE OF KNOWLEDGE. Society, 39(1), 89. Teune, H. (1989, December). The Information Society: Issues and Illusions/The Knowledge Society: The Growing Impact of Scientific Knowledge in Social Relations (Book). Social Forces, 68(2), 651-652. Read More