Discussion: How Knowledge Gets Made
Details
Why do some truths stick while others get ignored or challenged? Why does science, which is often framed as neutral, still reflect the priorities of the people and institutions that use it? How do fact-checkers, news outlets, and experts shape what counts as “knowledge”?
In this session, we’ll explore how knowledge is produced, validated, and amplified—not as a debate about what is true, but as a systems-level analysis of power, incentives, and psychology.
We’ll look at questions like:
- How do institutions (universities, labs, media, think tanks) shape what questions get asked and what answers are accepted?
- How do incentives influence which studies get funded, published, or amplified?
- How do “fact-checking” and expertise create trust, authority, and sometimes blind spots?
- How does social or political pressure influence what knowledge is considered legitimate?
Our approach
Our method is descriptive, not prescriptive: we aim to uncover patterns and mechanisms behind the production of knowledge, rather than arguing about individual claims.
We're not arguing that all expertise is illegitimate or that 'truth doesn't exist'. We're examining how the systems that produce and validate knowledge actually function, including their strengths and limitations.
Format:
- Guided discussion with clear analytical focus
- ~120 minutes
- Small group to ensure everyone can contribute