Zoe Z.

This study compares the classic car and traditional martial arts communities to explore how these communities benefit from or are harmed by the internet, and how knowledge lives within these communities. Both communities are non-occupational; they involve subjective, affective, and discipline-focused methods for cultivating knowledge and expertise rather than scientific methods. These communities are also focused on self-improvement rather than profit. The methods used in this study include participant observation, interviews, and analysis of primary and secondary documents. This study contributes to the literature on communities of practice by exploring how non-occupational communities of practice evolve and verify new knowledge rather than studying the attainment of a community of practice. This study argues that while these communities are increasingly using the internet to communicate and organize, expertise that new members gain from the internet is not truly ‘valid;’ because expertise in these communities is often based on legitimate peripheral participation, impersonal and disembodied sources of knowledge are seen as less valid. This study puts forth an analysis of four different kinds of knowledge within communities of practice, including traditional knowledge, new knowledge, anti-knowledge, and non-knowledge. The three most interesting discussions from this are the verification of new knowledge and the concept of anti-knowledge, which is rejected by community consensus on the basis of being variant knowledge or fake knowledge.

This study compares the classic car and traditional martial arts communities to explore how these communities benefit from or are harmed by the internet, and how knowledge lives within these communities. Both communities are non-occupational; they involve subjective, affective, and discipline-focused methods for cultivating knowledge and expertise rather than scientific methods. These communities are also focused on self-improvement rather than profit. The methods used in this study include participant observation, interviews, and analysis of primary and secondary documents. This study contributes to the literature on communities of practice by exploring how non-occupational communities of practice evolve and verify new knowledge rather than studying the attainment of a community of practice.

This study argues that while these communities are increasingly using the internet to communicate and organize, expertise that new members gain from the internet is not truly ‘valid;’ because expertise in these communities is often based on legitimate peripheral participation, impersonal and disembodied sources of knowledge are seen as less valid. This study puts forth an analysis of four different kinds of knowledge within communities of practice, including traditional knowledge, new knowledge, anti-knowledge, and non-knowledge. The three most interesting discussions from this are the verification of new knowledge and the concept of anti-knowledge, which is rejected by community consensus on the basis of being variant knowledge or fake knowledge.