The Fate of Expertise after WIKIPEDIA

Episteme 6 (1):52-73 (2009)
Abstract
Wikipedia has challenged traditional notions about the roles of experts in the Internet Age. Section 1 sets up a paradox. Wikipedia is a striking popular success, and yet its success can be attributed to the fact that it is wide open and bottom-up. How can such a successful knowledge project disdain expertise? Section 2 discusses the thesis that if Wikipedia could be shown by an excellent survey of experts to be fantastically reliable, then experts would not need to be granted positions of special authority. But, among other problems, this thesis is self-stultifying. Section 3 explores a couple ways in which egalitarian online communities might challenge the occupational roles or the epistemic leadership roles of experts. There is little support for the notion that the distinctive occupations that require expertise are being undermined. It is also implausible that Wikipedia and its like might take over the epistemic leadership roles of experts. Section 4 argues that a main reason that Wikipedia’s articles are as good as they are is that they are edited by knowledgeable people to whom deference is paid, although voluntarily. But some Wikipedia articles suffer because so many aggressive people drive off people more knowledgeable than they are; so there is no reason to think that Wikipedia’s articles will continually improve. Moreover, Wikipedia’s commitment to anonymity further drives off good contributors. Generally, some decisionmaking role for experts is not just consistent with online knowledge communities being open and bottom-up, it is recommended as well.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.3366/E1742360008000543
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 19,680
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2010-07-11

Total downloads

29 ( #130,247 of 1,790,119 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

10 ( #83,283 of 1,790,119 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.
http://philpapers.org/rec/SANTFO-4
philpapers.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2016-18
47428
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:GXAGMTLA6362ULM5R2ISQHWFNF5T44XF
<urn:uuid:53691265-0069-434a-b02f-42b7cdac92dc>
2016-05-02T11:14:33Z
129.100.74.150
sha1:XBTZ7Q2F6XEOA6N6KWXSVIYCMZNXZ6ZP
<urn:uuid:538c3f30-85bc-43d5-ba6c-53d1497ce6f8>
http://philpapers.org/rec/SANTFO-4
length
response
<urn:uuid:419df88e-a7a1-45b6-9778-5e170688528d>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-239-7-51.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-18
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for April 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf