The speaker in this talk emphasized how a priori knowledge, or the lack thereof has led to major problems in society, particularly in the realm of environmental activism. A priori knowledge is the knowledge gained from previous experiences, and is something that has been able to drive various efforts of change across the world. Having a personal connection with something, or having a personal experience with a particular issue does make it easier for someone to be affected enough to take action. But is a priori knowledge such a powerful force that without this knowledge in a certain issue, people are left to lethargy? While the power of a priori remains to be completely seen in the environmentalist movement, we can look throughout history and see that this is not entirely the case with all issues.
In many cases, people in positions of power (as a result of this power, positions of privilege) have made actions towards social progress that belie their lack of a priori knowledge on the subject. An example of this playing out in history is during the time of slavery, as well as the harmful aftermath that many African Americans experienced. In this example, the people with a priori knowledge about the damaging effects of racism were slaves. Slaves obviously had no way to generate any kind of influence, yet slavery was eventually abolished, against some strong opposition from southern states. White men, in positions of power, were the people who passed legislation to free slaves, and a war was fought, in part because of the persistence of the practice of slavery. Thousands of lives who had never experienced the effects that racism had on African American people were lost during this war, which wound up achieving vast social progress.
Some issues do exemplify the influence that having a priori knowledge has on meaningful change. For example, the water crisis in Flint, Michigan is an example where a priori knowledge or experience could potentially be having an impact on the rate of assistance being provided to the people of Flint. A priori knowledge coincides with privilege in this example, as people who are well off do not know the health effects of water that is not drinkable. However, this does not delegitimize a priori knowledge as an influence here, especially since poor water quality is such a foreign concept to many people who live in the United States, or any other first world country. However, to conclude that a priori knowledge is needed to produce widespread social change is too much of a general statement. Factors such as the specific issue being dealt with, as well as the people in positions of power are things that need to be taken into account when discussing social change.