"Knowledge is and will be produced in order to be sold, it is and will be consumed in order to be valorized in a new production: in both cases, the goal is exchange. Knowledge ceases to be an end in itself, it loses its 'use-value'." (Lyotard 4-5) I believe the second half of this statement to be false and the first half to be inconsequential. As long as liberal arts colleges exist, knowledge will always be an end in itself. This class offers me no material gain, any knowledge I gain will broaden my understanding of the world, but will have little effect on my career in Real Estate. In reference to the first statement, knowledge is knowledge no matter how it is obtained. Pharamachetuical companies discover new drugs, or knowledge, all the time for profit, yet that knowledge benefits everyone. I don't understand why all these authors speak with such a note of condescension with respect to any form of capitalist theory. We wouldn't have nearly the amount of drugs, quality institutions, and life improving objects. Hell, authors wouldn't have an outlet for their work if wasn't for publishers.
Which brings me to my next topic for discussion, the nature of narrative knowledge versus scientific knowledge and the llegitimacy of knowledge. The origin of the legitimacy of knowledge is a central theme in Lyotard's work. Narrative knowledge gains its legitimacy through the narrator who has witnessed the thing on which he is narrating. It is true because it has been witnessed and retold. Scientific knowledge gains its legitimacy through proofs. Using logic and experimentation, people gain a sense of authentic truth. Lyotard makes the very important point "How do you prove the [first] proof?" Namely, how can you prove that this particular system of study produces knowledge? What are the rules of the game? The beauty of scientific knowledge, that Lyotard alluded to but never addressed, is the ability to change over time. Something is only true until it is proven false. Nothing is ever totally, or legitimately, true over time and Lyotard seems to take issue with the fact that the truth of scientific knowledge is not completely legitimate.