If someone claims that both the division knowledge into disciplines and the division of the world into countries on a map is artificial, what does it mean? What is the nature of the boundaries between A.O.K, in your view?

If someone claims that both the division knowledge into disciplines and the division of the world into countries on a map is artificial, what does it mean? What is the nature of the boundaries between A.O.K, in your view?

“Artificial means made of human being rather than by nature.”

Paul Lachalier defines the division of knowledge as knowledge that is routinely assumed, being produced and consumed as what it is and where it is. This means that there are some parts of knowledge in their own subjects. Division of knowledge doesn’t exist by itself. But someone makes it. Basically, knowledge does not simply happen. People create knowledge, either doing it individually or in groups, and it is affected by his/ her surroundings. The first person that gave clues about the division of knowledge is John Locke. He believes that knowledge is the perception of the agreement or disagreement of two ideas. From this belief, John Locke divided knowledge into three parts, which are intuitive knowledge, demonstrative knowledge, and sensitive knowledge.
But what is actually perception? How could we know that John Locke is true? John Locke could state that knowledge is actually can be divided into three by using his senses to observe his surroundings. Through his senses, he could get empirical evidence so he perceived that basically knowledge could be divided into three groups.
There is another thing that can prove the division of knowledge is artificial, which is the development of it. At first, there were only three groups of knowledge, but then in 1964, Michael Polanyi found another knowledge. Through his past experience and observing others’ experience, Michael found Tacit Knowledge, which is saying that we could know more than we could tell. Knowledge keeps on developing and broadening until now, and this is also the prove that knowledge is artificial. How can something be developed without anyone’s help?
For example, it is impossible for a grade 1 student to learn reading without anyone’s help. He needs someone to teach him and lead him developing new things, including new words. There is no way that we can develop ourselves without someone helping us. This is actually what happened to...