Knowledge

I've never thought about the concept of knowledge at such a deep level until I read this weeks thread.  I fully grasped the idea that conversation is what creates knowledge and that conversations can happen internally as well as externally.  I liked the idea that the library is a quiet place where individuals can have loud internal conversations.  This is probably why I became irritated when a guy answered his cell phone in the "quiet area" of Bird Library (really guy?).  It was the internal conversation that I was having with the text that allowed me to form agreements with the author.

These agreements only became possible through the use of language.  The Atlas discussed two types of languages; L0 and L1.  Before reading this text whenever I would listen to my friends talk about gear (amps), I would be completely lost.  Now I know that I am lost because they are speaking a subject specific language, one that I am not familiar with.  The use of L0 and L1 language in searches was also an interesting topic.  In regards to library databases, I don't believe that L0 is as effective as L1.  During my undergrad we had a librarian teach us how to use the university's databases...I did not listen to what she said.  Instead I would go on databases like JSTOR type in a keyword and use the first article I found.  Had I known about Boolean or any other L1 library terminology I guarantee I could have found better results.

Another thing that I found interesting in this thread was the idea that artifacts do not hold knowledge.  The examples in the book and the ones online were very effective.  The Gutenberg Bible to me is important because it represents an innovative and pivotal time in history.  Others would say its important because it is the word of God.  Knowledge is brought to the artifact and while the artifact can be important in the context of a conversation, it cannot create knowledge on its own.