Decoding and Coping with the Forms of Fragmentation of Knowledge

Abstract

This paper identified reductionism, hasty conceptual generalization, Eurocentrism, and epistemological bias as forms of the fragmentation of knowledge. The fragmentation of knowledge goes against the philosophically Greek-based Western pattern of knowledge which was mainly in the hands of polymaths. The polymathic spirit remained until the emergence of Modernity. The emergent fragmentation of knowledge received criticism from thinkers such as Friedrich Nietzsche, Michel Foucault, Ivan Illich, Howard Gardner, Jürgen Wolfgang Habermas, and Chris B. Heilig. The division of knowledge into specializations has two-fold effects: positive such as deep specialization and negative as the loss of holistic understanding and fragmentation. There are four forms of fragmentation: (1) reductionism, (2) hasty conceptual generalization, (3) Eurocentrism, and (4) epistemological bias. Reductionism is epistemological and theoretical. Epistemological reductionism suggests that all knowledge can be reduced to a single form of explanation, whereas theoretical reductionism suggests that one theory can be reduced to or explained by another, more fundamental theory. Hasty conceptual generalization happens when a concept is extended beyond its appropriate scope, leading to the loss of the essence of the phenomenon to which the concept is applied. Eurocentrism is mainly to understand and interpret the world from a European perspective. Epistemological bias is the criticism of many epistemological errors that can be corrected by adopting mixed methods, proper hermeneutics, reflexivity, observer participation, and erosion of gender bias.