Glass of Wine

Today I'm reading a very intresing article about wine epistemology.
The role of standard and social behaviour in the mankind are something of quite inexplicable for philosophy.. But by my point of view the core of the argument is in that few world:

Taste requires knowledge to become good taste, that is, to belong to the licit sensory pleasures that a particular society considers as legitimate.

This consideration comes out by Carlo Petrini , founder of the Slow Food movement, that plays with the common etymology of the two Italian words sapore (taste) and sapere (knowledge). The relationship between knowledge and all the rest of human activities is an absolute certainty in a world that don'have any kind of absolute.

The eternal need of learning and knowledge of human being express itself in every aspect of social life, and involves also the aspects that semms to be out of cultural expereinces as we intend.
For example, wine is a pleasute that will be appreciated oly with an adeguate cultural background:

Wine seems of a special epistemological interest because it is an epistemic domain that we enter as adults and sometimes with relatively little cultural background to bias our taste and our judgement (...) We deliberatively decide to learn about wine, defer to experts and acquire their manners and expertise. Thus, trying to elucidate what sorts of epistemic strategies are at stake in the case of acquiring wine taste seems at a first glance easier than in the case of other domains whose acquisition can be affected by age, school education and coercive teaching.

The knowledge is the instrument wich help man to comprehend, and also to oppose to nature, and that concurs to create a common floor of concepts, ideas and elaborated experiences to share it with other men. This powerfull tool is involved with all the manifestations of humanity and concearnes all th aspect of our lives.

Walking History

The most important difference beetween mankind and the rest of the nature is the possibility of condivision of culture and knowledge. Condivision is like a red line that envolves all the history of human being, and represents in all the historical periods an important element of growing of knowledge, that cause the diffusion and the usability of methods, concepts and rules.

We used to say, as Newton, that we are “on the shoulder of giants”: we can use the work maded in a very long time by our ancestors, and we can learn by ours errors. We all refers ourselves to other for an infinite list of wills, needs and rules: this kind of condivision is an unique human ability, and generates education, speech, writing and other tecnical solutions.

Now we can use new tecnologies like Internet or other web tecnologies who presupposed the cooperation of persons and concepts as their bases: the interaction between person and concepts is now explicit, for the first time in the history of knowledge. This cause a new kind o philosophical problems, that ingages on first the gap beetween who have a complete access to the culture and who don't. To stand on the shoulder of the giant is quite impossible for more than an half of mankind, and virtually impossible for the major part of the other.

Can really the culture be a product owned by a limited number of persons? Or tecnical solution who consent the interrelation of a large number of person can save it by the destruction?

Standing on the (little) shoulders of giants

For a culture of the Sharing of knowledge in the Information Tecnologies Era

Like an Ariadne's yarn, sharing is in all times an important element for the growth of knowledge, and represent the most important difference between mankind and the rest of the nature: the possibility of sharing culture and knowledge each others. This ability of sharing information like a red line envolves all the history of mankind, and has different determinations that depend by the historical moments and other conditions. We used to say, like Newton, that we are “on the shoulders of giants”: it means that we can use the work made in a very long time by our ancestors, and that we are able to learn by their errors too. There is not a man who is completely isolated by the rest of the humanity, and all of us refer to others for an infinite list of wills, needs and rules.

This is a unique human ability, and represents an important element of the growing of knowledge. It comports consequences like education, speech, writing and other tecnical solutions.
For that, we can say that human society represent much more that the simple sum of the singles individuals that composed it: all the mankind has the possibility to let their knowledge grow by the sharing of problems and solutions.
All the bases of our culture are melted on symbols that have a common sense because shared, and are essential to create a world in the world that is comprehensible for everybody. The invention and the spread of writing have had an unique importance and many repercussions on the mankind; for that it is universal recognized like the starting point of human history. Writing concurs, through the use of comprehensible signs based on conventions like alphabet and garammar, to the graphical representation of the concrete and the abstract. With these supports, a man can be able to communicate his ideas through space and time, and cause a completely different way of intending the nature of knowledge. This arguments supposed that all the person has the same access, and the same right to use and manage knowledge in all the form it can have. Without education is simply impossible to access to this system of organization of the culture: for that, it caused also the first discrimination.

In different historical periods it caused differents approaches to teaching and divulgation of culture.
This process stands out by different aspects: in first, the possibility of writing and speech, that presupposed shared rules, solid bases for the developing of knowledge, and the possibility of comunication of the results.
Another aspect is the great number of Schools, Universities, Academies, Foundations and other Association that proposed theirselves to spread education through the history, made on the ancient model of Plato's Accademia or Aristotle's Liceo; that expresses also the will of letting the knowledge pass by one generation to another.
A different aspect stand out on the use of methods, like the scientific method; this can be described as a simple model that can be used to obtain misurable and replicable result. This kind of approach was born in the period called “Scientific Revolution”, and coincide with the introduction of experiments as bases of science. The sharing of methods, and its results, touch every point of the chain of transmission of knowledge, with consequences like the boom of works and invention of that period.

Every philosopher has tried to identify the human peculiarity in attitudes or characteristic, but without the possibility to quantify with numbers, or to describe all in laws, as the exact sciences. Any result has been thought, elaborated conceptually and subsequently communicated or written for being shared with the other. Every argument has been exposed and examined in depth from an entire community of thinkers who, with the most various interests and scopes, have brought their contribution to the resolution of a particular problem, or to the definition of new doubts, in a neverending process.
The scope is to find a common horizon in which we can analyze the content of the knowledge, to proceed in the elaboration of theories and models and to organize it to make available it to all those who wants to use it. (Therefore, the problem is moved from the possibility to know something, and in that way, to the attempt that the difficultly elaborated material can "pass" to an other person without losing essential information.)
The last aim of the sharing of the knowledge is the creation of a system to comprising and explaining the greatest number of events is possible, and to completing forecasts on the future.

The sharing culture refers to a particular communities, the world of scientific research and University: it has similar rules, likes the attribution of the merits and the plans, that uses it for gives speed to the increase of knowledge. Another community in which the sharing of culture has placed solid roots is composed by the world of Internet and the so-called free software, and is generally defined the hacker community. They has developed a series of procedures and conventions to the sharing of the contents, that configures a mature and authentic culture of the sharing.

New tecnologies, like Internet or other IT tecnologies, presupposes the cooperation of different individuals and concepts as theirs bases: this interaction is explicit for the first time in the history of knowledge, both in technical and in conceptual aspect. This cause a new kind of philosophical problems, that ingage on first the gap between who has a complete access to the culture's media and who doesn't. To stand on this little shoulders is quite impossible for more than one half of the mankind, and virtually impossible for the majority part of the other too. We have in our hands tecnical instruments that can distribute knowledge everywhere with no cost, but often the use of this tecnical solutions is submitted to copyright laws that are inspired by a strong conception of intellectual property, and it is not sufficiently clear what is public domain and not. This situation causes a straight opposition by industries, and isn't completely clear if they are defending their rigths or only their privileges.

These new tecnical instruments aren't only a simple auxilium in the doing of something: the utilization of these tecnical means cause difference between the results obtained with one or anoter method.
For example, text distribution is different if made with an electronic distribution list or with paper. In the first case we have an interactivity and a velocity that we cannot have in the second example. This isn't only an organizative problem, but also a different concept of distribution of knowledge, and influences also the possibilities of use again a concept.
For example, if the use of a portion of code is prohibited, generally for the appication of the copyrights laws, all the developers cannot use it: it means that the instruction contained in that portion cannot be executed. To use it, is necessary to pay royalties: is it a correct interpretation of the principle of intellectual properties protection or an ancient law that is useless in that new conditions?

An answer can be reached analizing the concept of sharing of knowledge in computer science and in the so-called world Open Source, than for its method of sharing of the knowledge seems to be an example of the paradigm of the science, based on a continuous exchange of information.
Surely computer science has made various elements of the sharing of the knowledge: this has happened nearly for case, for "guilt" of a relatively little group of passionates, that have created the biggest working shared plan up to now: the operating system Linux.
Linux it is not that the tip of the iceberg of an immense ideological movement that has its bases in the refusal of the actual interpretation of intellectual property. It works on the idea that every person has the right to use the work maded dy other developers, and give the same right on his works. This is strongly similar to one's Research Labs method, or University, in wich the freedom of using oters work is encouraged and permitted under the respect of some ethical laws.
But what is the right way to manage this new features, and to have an ethically correct approach to these problems? Can really the culture be a product owned by a little number of individuals? Or network and cooperative solutions can save it by the destruction?

The problem has two aspects: the hardware and the software side. The Hardware side depends on big tecnologies and industries, and moves a large amount of money: for that, it can be influenced only by investors.
On the other hand, the software side is opened to the community of developers, who can create and distribute their products in all the ways they likes. There are 2 ways to do this: the commercial way, quite a normal commerce, and the open source mode, that doesn't ever preview the payment of royalties or other fees, and prevides the possibility of using portions of products for developing other ones without charges. The open source model represents the modern solution of the ancient problem to give certain bases to the knowledge building, bases that must be shared by all the people who partecipate to the research.
To get an answer we can observe the developing model of Linux, an Operative System entirely created by a large groups of volunteers only connected by internet. In spite of every prevision, this chaotic, bazaar-like organization model reaches its aim in full. The “normal” way to intend copyright is replaced by a social structure that is able to guarantee the respect of the ethical norms at the base of the structure.
It means that there is a community made of persons who have the target of the distribution of knowledge “peer to peer”, trying to reach the perfection in the writing of codes. Every person who has an appropriate tecnical baggage can try to do it, and receive the support of all the community, on condition that he respects the rules of the community itself. The community cannot apply any sanction to the members: it has only a moral authority. In spite of that, there is only a little amount of violations of the rules.

The core of that system is a new kind of licensing model: the GPL, or General Public License, ideated By Richard Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation, in the 1983. It was also called “copyleft”, and is a middle way beetwen the public domain, that cannot guarantee any legal protection, and the normal way, too restricted. Linux birth is the consequence of all those turmoils, and start when a young student encounter some problems with an operating system, and decides to do another one with his hands. The boy, called Linus Torwalds, on 1990 release the project of Linux for the first time on internet, and asks to other developers only a contribution on code writing and problem's segnalations. A large numbers of programmers decides to work on this project in free time, and in a pair of years Linux becames a real, functioning and well-done operating system.
The real innovation is the method of cooperation on that the work was based: with no differences beetween one or another members, the only judgement is on the quality of the code written; it causes an incredible velocity and quality of the developing of the project. The large number of person who taking part to the works causes that the errors and the bugs are quickly individuated and solved by strongly motivated and qualificated persons.
But the most intresting aspect is the fact that a relatively big number of persons decides to do something without the promise of money or other financial benefits, but quite only for fun. The main spring was the passion for code writing and competition with other; economic factors are subordinated in relationship with socials and ethicals motivations.

This kind of organization and this new way of approaching the problems of knowledge need an adeguate philosophical investigation, that examines accurately all the aspects of the problem, and helps the right comprehension of one of the newest horizons of mankind.
Isn't now clear because the sharing of thoughs, an ancient method of developing of knowledge, as history proves actually is becamed the newest approach to the problem of distribution of informations; and because this kind of approach, normally used in Universities and Research Lab, is prohibited by specific laws in the “normal” world.
But, the most important thing to notice is the birth of an ethic behaviour without forcing or other forms of constriction. To analyze because it works on a little number of person (and because it doesn't work on a mass) is very important to understand the functioning in practice of the human ethic and the relationship beetween ethic, moral and everyday behaviour.
This is an unique research lab to study how a community can birth, creates rules and lives with big interference from outside, and why it can survive when it approach the other communities preserving its peculiarities.