From f.kovacs at btinternet.com Sat Nov 1 05:40:35 2008 From: f.kovacs at btinternet.com (FERENC KOVACS) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 09:40:35 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] use of knowledge/interpretation and methods Message-ID: <7233.55625.qm@web86408.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> There are two?major problems about trying to solve the problems caused to Nature and Humankind by human activities. One problem is that in the developped world especially and elsewehere countries are interested in sustainable?development, which practically means to keep on making money. Making money comes first in accepting innovations and new ideas and most of the organisations are organised to make money and they have their own design and development teams, so no outsider (external non-business entity) could push through an idea based?on rationally solving a problem, yet not necessarily making money thereby. Another problem is that the current state of scientific research and development and organisational setup are based on the principle of divide and conquer.?We live in one world, but we attribute different names to chunks of reality subject to nationalities, disciplines, languages, etc. So instead of trying to define the basic common concepts of knowledge we seek to develop different lingos, automaticaly separating us and preventing us from understanding the connections (interrelations).?Even people involved in AI applications and Core Ontology find it difficult to unite and integrate knowledge in various disciplines and fields, because of the lack of harmonisation and synchronisation of terms and vocabulary?between scinetific and scholarly endevours. Frank K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20081101/836b0c42/attachment.html From WJKELLPRO at aol.com Sat Nov 1 14:08:12 2008 From: WJKELLPRO at aol.com (WJKELLPRO at aol.com) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:08:12 EDT Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] use of knowledge/interpretation and methods Message-ID: Hi Frank! Interesting analysis. Here are a couple of questions that occur to me: a) Who is doing the dividing and conquering? Why are they doing it? How do they benefit from it? b) What do you have in mind when you suggest that we can "define the basic common concepts of knowledge"? c) AI assumes the validity of the machine metaphor for the operations of the human mind. But I, for one, totally reject that dehumanizing notion as an affront to human dignity. It is superficial, linear, and can't account for feelings, intuitions, the capacities to appreciate beauty and the importance of one problem over another, or the ability to creatively leap into a surprising solution to a perplexing problem, or to create art, etc. So, how can genuine differences in conceptualizing human reality ever be overcome so that the one reality can be truly conceptualized? If you can suggest any readings re a) and b), I'd appreciate it. Bill Kelleher In a message dated 11/1/2008 2:40:58 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, f.kovacs at btinternet.com writes: Another problem is that the current state of scientific research and development and organizational setup are based on the principle of divide and conquer. We live in one world, but we attribute different names to chunks of reality subject to nationalities, disciplines, languages, etc. So instead of trying to define the basic common concepts of knowledge we seek to develop different lingos, automatically separating us and preventing us from understanding the connections (interrelations). Even people involved in AI applications and Core Ontology find it difficult to unite and integrate knowledge in various disciplines and fields, because of the lack of harmonization and synchronization of terms and vocabulary between scientific and scholarly endeavors. **************Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. Check out Today's Hot 5 Travel Deals! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212416248x1200771803/aol?redir=http://travel.aol.com/discount-travel?ncid=emlcntustrav00000001) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20081101/5a322b73/attachment.html From f.kovacs at btinternet.com Sat Nov 1 14:44:43 2008 From: f.kovacs at btinternet.com (FERENC KOVACS) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 18:44:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] use of knowledge/interpretation and methods Message-ID: <209888.75546.qm@web86402.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi Bill, I am honoured. here bis a short and quick reply: a)? Who is doing the dividing and conquering?? It is our mind that works that way. You acquire knowledge by chunking reality. By?following informal logic and not formal logic, and still building all your knowledge using three basic categories, such as objects, properties and relations you create the internal world (reflective thinking) of the external reality. But becasue of the speed of thought and the inadequacy of introspection for the purpose of identifying micro mental operations that produce semantic primitives and their chains we are not aware of the working of our brain and we shallnot get any closer by dissecting it or doing any other neurophysiologival research, just as disassembling a computer woill not give you an idea of the algorithms running on it. The snag is in relations that are hidden and which are in the centre of all sciences and disciplines. Science is diciplined thinking (John Dewey: How we think), and it is not by chance that disciplines are the compartments of knowledge. by the was G.B. shaw says that all trades are a conspiracy against the lay people (via using a lingo). ?Why are they doing it?? How do they benefit from it? b)? What do you have in mind when you suggest that we can "define the basic common concepts of knowledge"? That is called upper or core ontology, But the core ontology langauges used in AI today are not correct that is why they cannot integrate them (they want to merge them, which is a very bad idea anyway) c)? AI assumes the validity of the machine metaphor for the operations of the human mind.? t is the other way round everythibng we create (including AI) is a refle3ction of the ways our minds are working. But I, for one, totally reject that dehumanizing notion as an affront to human dignity.? It is superficial, linear, and can't account for feelings, intuitions, the capacities to appreciate beauty and the importance of one problem over another, or the ability to creatively leap into a surprising solution to a perplexing problem, or to create art, etc.? We are an organic system of control circuits - figuratively speaking. So logic is just one side of the human faculties, emotions and will are also in play with will on top of the hierarchy of forces working in us in forms of motives, etc. Informal logic is the way to clearing up the mess, not formal logic, which is now too abstarct and privileged so much so that those ontologists want to augment huiman intellect and create a society of casts - subject to level of intelligence measured in terms of access to those abtsract ideas (and money) So, how can genuine differences in conceptualizing human reality ever be overcome so that the?one reality can be truly conceptualized? the starup is a simple statement that we truly live in one world. If you agree, then next step is to chumnk this reality and give each pieces a name. If you and me speak a different language, we need to harmonize our concepts (experience of reality9 and just the words or their so caled meaning. If we are good enough, we can agree on the identification of any chunk of realia no amtter whetehr you speak English and I speak Swaheli.? the nfianl identification we use for anything in this world is a spatial temporal parameter. Think about that. And we are likely to revise our concept of time, space and cause and effect to make the message clear that agreemnt is possible as soon as you stop playing competion and rivalry and referring an nsolved problem to one level up, as the case may be. Aweaiting any othger queries and asking you to allow me to cc our correspondece to another forum member Bob who is wroking in Africa now and also got a question. If you can suggest any readings re a) and b), I'd appreciate it. As far as reading materials are concerned my sources on the subject are not concentrated enough, i am in the process of putting all the relevant thoughts together and find someone to be interested inb publishing or sponsoring it. But I canb promise to send you links as i go along in my research which i have announced to star but so far noone seemed to be interested. have a look at my website below.I hope this is okay for a start ? Kindest regards, Ferenc Kovacs alias Frank Genezistan "Starting all over" +44 7770654068 (Vodafone) Landline: 01635 45554 www.firkasz.com?and http://www.virtus.hu/?id=user_art&user_id=7681 5 St. Mary's Place Newbury, Berkshire RG14 1EG U. K.? ? ----- Original Message ---- From: "WJKELLPRO at aol.com" To: interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu Sent: Saturday, 1 November, 2008 6:08:12 PM Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] use of knowledge/interpretation and methods Hi Frank! Interesting analysis.? Here are a couple of questions that occur to me: a)? Who is doing the dividing and conquering?? Why are they doing it?? How do they benefit from it? b)? What do you have in mind when you suggest that we can "define the basic common concepts of knowledge"? c)? AI assumes the validity of the machine metaphor for the operations of the human mind.? But I, for one, totally reject that dehumanizing notion as an affront to human dignity.? It is superficial, linear, and can't account for feelings, intuitions, the capacities to appreciate beauty and the importance of one problem over another, or the ability to creatively leap into a surprising solution to a perplexing problem, or to create art, etc.? So, how can genuine differences in conceptualizing human reality ever be overcome so that the?one reality can be truly conceptualized? If you can suggest any readings re a) and b), I'd appreciate it. Bill Kelleher In a message dated 11/1/2008 2:40:58 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, f.kovacs at btinternet.com writes: Another problem is that the current state of scientific research and development and organizational setup are based on the principle of divide and conquer.?We live in one world, but we attribute different names to chunks of reality subject to nationalities, disciplines, languages, etc. So instead of trying to define the basic common concepts of knowledge we seek to develop different lingos, automatically separating us and preventing us from understanding the connections (interrelations).?Even people involved in AI applications and Core Ontology find it difficult to unite and integrate knowledge in various disciplines and fields, because of the lack of harmonization and synchronization of terms and vocabulary?between scientific and scholarly endeavors.? ________________________________ Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. Check out Today's Hot 5 Travel Deals! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20081101/79475f48/attachment-0001.html From f.kovacs at btinternet.com Sat Nov 1 14:53:04 2008 From: f.kovacs at btinternet.com (FERENC KOVACS) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 18:53:04 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] use of knowledge/interpretation and methods Message-ID: <317361.7890.qm@web86404.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> My appologies. I have not noticed that my answer goes back to the forum. i should have checked?my spelling mistakes at least. Sorry folks Frank ----- Original Message ---- From: "WJKELLPRO at aol.com" To: interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu Sent: Saturday, 1 November, 2008 6:08:12 PM Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] use of knowledge/interpretation and methods Hi Frank! Interesting analysis.? Here are a couple of questions that occur to me: a)? Who is doing the dividing and conquering?? Why are they doing it?? How do they benefit from it? b)? What do you have in mind when you suggest that we can "define the basic common concepts of knowledge"? c)? AI assumes the validity of the machine metaphor for the operations of the human mind.? But I, for one, totally reject that dehumanizing notion as an affront to human dignity.? It is superficial, linear, and can't account for feelings, intuitions, the capacities to appreciate beauty and the importance of one problem over another, or the ability to creatively leap into a surprising solution to a perplexing problem, or to create art, etc.? So, how can genuine differences in conceptualizing human reality ever be overcome so that the?one reality can be truly conceptualized? If you can suggest any readings re a) and b), I'd appreciate it. Bill Kelleher In a message dated 11/1/2008 2:40:58 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, f.kovacs at btinternet.com writes: Another problem is that the current state of scientific research and development and organizational setup are based on the principle of divide and conquer.?We live in one world, but we attribute different names to chunks of reality subject to nationalities, disciplines, languages, etc. So instead of trying to define the basic common concepts of knowledge we seek to develop different lingos, automatically separating us and preventing us from understanding the connections (interrelations).?Even people involved in AI applications and Core Ontology find it difficult to unite and integrate knowledge in various disciplines and fields, because of the lack of harmonization and synchronization of terms and vocabulary?between scientific and scholarly endeavors.? ________________________________ Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. Check out Today's Hot 5 Travel Deals! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20081101/0d2bd792/attachment.html From WJKELLPRO at aol.com Sat Nov 1 16:14:56 2008 From: WJKELLPRO at aol.com (WJKELLPRO at aol.com) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 16:14:56 EDT Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] use of knowledge/interpretation and methods Message-ID: Hi again Frank! I just checked out your website. Fantastic! Since you work as a translator from Hungarian to English and vice versa, I posted your name and address on the Yahoo Polanyi Society discussion list, at: _http://groups.yahoo.com/group/polanyi_list/message/1635_ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/polanyi_list/message/1635) Polanyi was Hungarian. He practiced medicine there, and fought for Hungry in WWI. Below is a quote from your website. It fairly well describes the first ? of Polanyi?s main book, Personal Knowledge. Do all great Hungarian minds think alike? ?Genezistan is a name given to an issue that intrigues me and which may develop into a new field of study. It comes from Genezis, the story of emergence (both creation and evolution) and tan, a Hungarian word for study (to be used in place of -ology as a suffix). ? Some of the ideas used in creating Genezistan are: 1) Every human has the same mental assets regardless of the language acquired, 2) Thinking comes before acquiring a particular language, thus animals are also capable of thinking, etc., 3) Every person goes through the same mental development cycle as the human race in the course of learning about the world and acquiring a language. That is to say ontogenesis repeating phylogenesis is at work here too as it is in Biology.? Bill **************Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. Check out Today's Hot 5 Travel Deals! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212416248x1200771803/aol?redir=http://travel.aol.com/discount-travel?ncid=emlcntustrav00000001) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20081101/c84dd0d2/attachment.html From f.kovacs at btinternet.com Sat Nov 1 16:49:45 2008 From: f.kovacs at btinternet.com (FERENC KOVACS) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 20:49:45 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] use of knowledge/interpretation and methods Message-ID: <980692.47374.qm@web86403.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Thanks. the mesage for the list prceeded this one, no worries ? Kindest regards, Ferenc Kovacs alias Frank Genezistan "Starting all over" +44 7770654068 (Vodafone) Landline: 01635 45554 www.firkasz.com?and http://www.virtus.hu/?id=user_art&user_id=7681 5 St. Mary's Place Newbury, Berkshire RG14 1EG U. K.? ? ----- Original Message ---- From: "WJKELLPRO at aol.com" To: interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu Sent: Saturday, 1 November, 2008 8:14:56 PM Subject: Re: [Interpretationandmethods] use of knowledge/interpretation and methods Hi again Frank! ? I just checked out your website.? Fantastic!? Since you work as a translator from Hungarian to English and vice versa, I posted your name and address on the Yahoo Polanyi Society discussion list, at: ? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/polanyi_list/message/1635 ? ? Polanyi was Hungarian.? He practiced medicine there, and fought for Hungry in WWI.? Below is a quote from your website.? It fairly well describes the first ? of Polanyi?s main book, Personal Knowledge.? Do all great Hungarian minds think alike? ? ?Genezistan is a name given to an issue that intrigues me and which may develop into a new field of study. It comes from Genezis, the story of emergence (both creation?and evolution) and tan, a Hungarian word for study (to be used in place?of?-ology as a suffix). ? ? Some of the ideas used in creating Genezistan are: 1)? Every human has the same mental assets regardless of the language acquired, 2) Thinking comes before acquiring a particular language, thus animals are also capable of thinking, etc., 3) Every person goes through the same mental development cycle as the human race in the course of learning about the world and acquiring a language. That is to say?ontogenesis repeating phylogenesis is at work here too as it is in Biology.? ? Bill ? ? ________________________________ Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. Check out Today's Hot 5 Travel Deals! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20081101/2b3a29a3/attachment.html From jhuns at vt.edu Thu Nov 20 11:21:45 2008 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:21:45 -0500 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] CFP: Internet Research 10.0 Internet: Critical References: Message-ID: <153E693B-412D-47F3-A256-22F824A70F43@vt.edu> > (this is the 10th anniversary) Apologies for x-posting, please > distribute as appropriate-jh > Call for Papers > > Internet Research 10.0 -- Internet: Critical > http://ir10.aoir.org/ > > The 10th Annual International and Interdisciplinary Conference of the > Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) > > October 7-11, 2009 > Hilton Milwaukee City Center > Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA > > > As the Internet has become an increasingly ubiquitous and mundane > medium, the analytical shortcomings of the division between the online > and the offline have become evident. Shifting the focus to the > fundamental intermeshing of online and offline spaces, networks, > economies, politics, locations, agencies, and ethics, Internet: > Critical invites scholars to consider material frameworks, > infrastructures, and exchanges as enabling constraints in terms of > online phenomena. Furthermore, the conference invites considerations > of Internet research as a critical practice and theory, its > intellectual histories, investments, and social reverberations. How do > we, as Internet researchers, connect our work to social concerns or > cultural developments both local and global, and what kinds of agency > may we exercise in the process? What kinds of redefinitions of the > political (in terms of networks, micropolitics, participation, > lifestyles, resistant or critical practices) are necessary when > conceptualizing Internet cultures within the current geopolitical and > geotechnological climate? > > To this end, we call for papers, panel proposals, and presentations > from any discipline, methodology, and community, and from conjunctions > of multiple disciplines, methodologies and academic communities that > address the conference themes, including papers that intersect and/or > interconnect the following: > > ? critical moments, elements, practices > ? critical theories, methods, constructs > ? critical voices, histories, texts > ? critical networks, junctures, spaces > ? critical technologies, artifacts, failures > ? critical ethics, interventions, alternatives. > > Sessions at the conference will be established that specifically > address the conference themes, and we welcome innovative, exciting, > and unexpected takes on those themes. We also welcome submissions on > topics that address social, cultural, political, legal, aesthetic, > economic, and/or philosophical aspects of the Internet beyond the > conference themes. In all cases, we welcome disciplinary and > interdisciplinary submissions as well as international collaborations > from both AoIR and non-AoIR members. > > > SUBMISSIONS > > We seek proposals for several different kinds of contributions. We > welcome proposals for traditional academic conference PAPERS and we > also welcome proposals for ROUNDTABLE SESSIONS that will focus on > discussion and interaction among conference delegates, as well as > organized PANEL PROPOSALS that present a coherent group of papers on a > single theme. > > > DEADLINES > > Call for Papers Released: 15 November 2008 > Submissions Due: 1 February 2009 > Notification: 15 March 2009 > > > SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS > > All papers and presentations in this session will be evaluated in a > standard blind peer review. > > Format > > - PAPERS (individual or multi-author) - submit abstract of 600-800 > words > > -FULL PAPERS (OPTIONAL): For submitters requiring peer review of full > papers, manuscripts of up to 8,000 words will be accepted for review. > These will be reviewed and judged separately from abstract submissions > > - PANEL PROPOSALS - submit a 600-800 word description of the panel > theme, plus 250-500 word abstract for each paper or presentation > > - ROUNDTABLE PROPOSALS - submit a statement indicating the nature of > the roundtable discussion and interaction > Papers, presentations and panels will be selected from the submitted > proposals on the basis of multiple blind peer review, coordinated and > overseen by the Program Chair. Each individual is invited to submit a > proposal for 1 paper or 1 presentation. A person may also propose a > panel session, which may include a second paper that they are > presenting. An individual may also submit a roundtable proposal. You > may be listed as co-author on additional papers as long as you are not > presenting them. > > > PUBLICATION OF PAPERS > > Selected papers from the conference will be published in a special > issue of the journal Information, Communication & Society, edited by > Caroline Haythornwaite and Lori Kendall. Authors selected for > submission for this issue have already been contacted prior to the > conference. > > All papers submitted to the conference system will be available to > AoIR members after the conference. > > > PRE-CONFERENCE WORKSHOPS > > On October 7, 2009, there will be a limited number of pre-conference > workshops which will provide participants with in-depth, hands-on and/ > or creative opportunities. We invite proposals for these pre- > conference workshops. Local presenters are encouraged to propose > workshops that will invite visiting researchers into their labs or > studios or locales. Proposals should be no more than 1000 words, and > should clearly outline the purpose, methodology, structure, costs, > equipment and minimal attendance required, as well as explaining its > relevance to the conference as a whole. Proposals will be accepted if > they demonstrate that the workshop will add significantly to the > overall program in terms of thematic depth, hands on experience, or > local opportunities for scholarly or artistic connections. These > proposals and all inquiries regarding pre-conference proposals should > be submitted as soon as possible to both the Conference Chair and > Program Chair and no later than March 31, 2009. > Conference Workshops: http://conferences.aoir.org/workshops.htm > > > CONTACT INFORMATION > > Program Chair: Susanna Paasonen, Helsinki Collegium for Advanced > Studies > Conference Co-Chairs and Coordinators: Elizabeth Buchanan, Michael > Zimmer, UW-Milwaukee School of Information Studies and Center for > Information Policy Research; Steve Jones, University of Illinois- > Chicago > Vice-President of AoIR: Mia Consalvo, Ohio University > Association Website: http://www.aoir.org > > Conference Website: http://ir10.aoir.org/ > > > SPONSORS (partial list)** > > ? School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee > ? Center for Information Policy Research, University of Wisconsin- > Milwaukee > ? Department of Communication Studies, University of Illinois-Chicago > ? Center for Information and Society and the Department of > Communication, University of Washington > ? American Society for Information Science and Technology?Wisconsin > Chapter > > **Institutions or organizations interested in sponsorship > opportunities should contact Elizabeth Buchanan?eliz1679 at uwm.edu > > -- > Michael Zimmer, PhD > Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies > Associate, Center for Information Policy Research > University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee > e: zimmerm at uwm.edu > w: www.michaelzimmer.org > > > > ____ > 2008 Annual Meeting > People Transforming Information - Information Transforming People > October 24-29, 2008, Columbus, Ohio > ________________________________________ > Asis-l mailing list > Asis-l at asis.org > http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/asis-l From jhuns at vt.edu Thu Nov 20 11:46:35 2008 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:46:35 -0500 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Call for Papers: STS Across Borders Graduate Student Conference Message-ID: <503D7B23-F996-4AF7-B49E-B984311CD46A@vt.edu> sCall for Papers: STS Across Borders Graduate Student Conference March 20-22, 2009 | Blacksburg, Virginia Keynote Speakers: Banu Subramaniam, University of Massachusetts Amherst and Fa-ti Fan, SUNY Binghamton Abstract submissions: Please send an abstract (minimum 250 words, maximum of 400 words) dealing with the issues mentioned below and/or related issues to Bob Darrow (darrow at vt.edu) or Cora Olson (cowebb at vt.edu) in DOC or RTF format. If you do not plan to present in person, please indicate this in your abstract. The deadline for submissions is December 5, 2008. Notifications of acceptance will be sent by January 9. Since the emergence of EuroAmerican STS, the field has gone to great lengths to mitigate the pitfalls endemic to knowledge production, in part through the principle of reflexivity. If the field's focus on the relationships between wider sociopolitical and historical contexts and the production / appropriation / translation of technoscientific knowledge has been a point of reinvention, then it might be time for a reinvention of STS by making the production of STS knowledge itself an object of study. In this sense, we hope to explore questions of a critical STS of STS that stays true to the principle of reflexivity, and further decenters, rehistoricizes, and pluralizes what has been taken to be "STS" by asking, "What does STS look like across and within Borders?" This conference builds on the concept of "border crossings" by conceptualizing borders not just as geopolitical boundaries, and thus seeks to understand what STS practice, intervention, methodology, and thinking look like across and within a multiplicity of borders. We intend this conference to help foster a transborder space for STS practitioners / theorists/ interventionists. We believe STS scholars and practitioners worldwide would benefit from a plurality of STS approaches. We ask participants to explore such 'border crossings' as: ? STS across geopolitical borders ? such as Daiwie Fu's position paper "How Far Can East Asian STS Go?" in EASTS. Fu asks "whether a distinctive historical experience and thus probably a shared East Asian STS theoretical perspective" is "indeed different from simply applying Western STS perspectives to East Asian 'area studies.' [Then] we indeed would expect distinctive East Asian STS theories, not to mention distinctive STS stories, case studies, and histories." ? STS across academic and activist/interventionist borders, exploring STS work with/in NGOs, social entrepreneurship organizations, theatre and community groups, and other 'non-academic' spaces. ? STS across new intra-academic disciplinary borders such as STS and Postcolonial Studies, STS and Feminists Studies, STS and Environmental Studies, STS and Art, STS and Peace Studies, and other fields In the spirit of reflexivity, we ask participants to keep in mind such questions as: ? What epistemological and institutional changes need to be made in our current practices to facilitate exchanges across borders? ? What is at stake in the move to further diversify STS across borders? ? What does it mean to "enroll" previously absent "actors" into STS? ? How do we recognize the importance of constructing and maintaining borders in relation to power? And how does an STS with a tendency to deterritorialize grapple with these historical 'border politics'? ? How do we avoid the pitfalls of essentializing identities? ? How do we theorize the tensions between STS as universal and STS as multiplicities? Acknowledging that the usual conference settings contribute to the power differentials of STS across borders, we invite participants to partake in the integration of innovative modes of exchange including: sessions in the virtual world of Second Life, submission of pre- recorded video presentations, and other alternate modes mixed with traditional conference modes of presentation. While we recognize that these approaches do not solve the multiple asymmetries that exist, we hope that they serve as a beginning for extending the possibilities of STS across borders. From lk180 at columbia.edu Thu Nov 20 11:59:46 2008 From: lk180 at columbia.edu (Laleh Khalili) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:59:46 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Call for Papers: STS Across Borders Graduate Student Conference In-Reply-To: <503D7B23-F996-4AF7-B49E-B984311CD46A@vt.edu> References: <503D7B23-F996-4AF7-B49E-B984311CD46A@vt.edu> Message-ID: Hiya What is STS? (I thought this sort of utter dependence on unfathomable acronyms was just a military thing!!!!). Laleh On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, jeremy hunsinger wrote: > sCall for Papers: STS Across Borders Graduate Student Conference > > March 20-22, 2009 | Blacksburg, Virginia > > Keynote Speakers: Banu Subramaniam, University of Massachusetts > Amherst and Fa-ti Fan, SUNY Binghamton > > Abstract submissions: Please send an abstract (minimum 250 words, > maximum of 400 words) dealing with the issues mentioned below and/or > related issues to Bob Darrow (darrow at vt.edu) or Cora Olson > (cowebb at vt.edu) in DOC or RTF format. If you do not plan to present in > person, please indicate this in your abstract. The deadline for > submissions is December 5, 2008. Notifications of acceptance will be > sent by January 9. > > Since the emergence of EuroAmerican STS, the field has gone to great > lengths to mitigate the pitfalls endemic to knowledge production, in > part through the principle of reflexivity. If the field's focus on the > relationships between wider sociopolitical and historical contexts and > the production / appropriation / translation of technoscientific > knowledge has been a point of reinvention, then it might be time for a > reinvention of STS by making the production of STS knowledge itself an > object of study. In this sense, we hope to explore questions of a > critical STS of STS that stays true to the principle of reflexivity, > and further decenters, rehistoricizes, and pluralizes what has been > taken to be "STS" by asking, "What does STS look like across and > within Borders?" This conference builds on the concept of "border > crossings" by conceptualizing borders not just as geopolitical > boundaries, and thus seeks to understand what STS practice, > intervention, methodology, and thinking look like across and within a > multiplicity of borders. > > We intend this conference to help foster a transborder space for STS > practitioners / theorists/ interventionists. We believe STS scholars > and practitioners worldwide would benefit from a plurality of STS > approaches. We ask participants to explore such 'border crossings' as: > > ? STS across geopolitical borders ? such as Daiwie Fu's > position paper "How Far Can East Asian STS Go?" in EASTS. Fu asks > "whether a distinctive historical experience and thus probably a > shared East Asian STS theoretical perspective" is "indeed different > from simply applying Western STS perspectives to East Asian 'area > studies.' [Then] we indeed would expect distinctive East Asian STS > theories, not to mention distinctive STS stories, case studies, and > histories." > > ? STS across academic and activist/interventionist borders, > exploring STS work with/in NGOs, social entrepreneurship > organizations, theatre and community groups, and other 'non-academic' > spaces. > > ? STS across new intra-academic disciplinary borders such as > STS and Postcolonial Studies, STS and Feminists Studies, STS and > Environmental Studies, STS and Art, STS and Peace Studies, and other > fields > > In the spirit of reflexivity, we ask participants to keep in mind such > questions as: > > ? What epistemological and institutional changes need to be > made in our current practices to facilitate exchanges across borders? > > ? What is at stake in the move to further diversify STS across > borders? > > ? What does it mean to "enroll" previously absent "actors" > into STS? > > ? How do we recognize the importance of constructing and > maintaining borders in relation to power? And how does an STS with a > tendency to deterritorialize grapple with these historical 'border > politics'? > > ? How do we avoid the pitfalls of essentializing identities? > > ? How do we theorize the tensions between STS as universal and > STS as multiplicities? > > Acknowledging that the usual conference settings contribute to the > power differentials of STS across borders, we invite participants to > partake in the integration of innovative modes of exchange including: > sessions in the virtual world of Second Life, submission of pre- > recorded video presentations, and other alternate modes mixed with > traditional conference modes of presentation. While we recognize that > these approaches do not solve the multiple asymmetries that exist, we > hope that they serve as a beginning for extending the possibilities of > STS across borders. > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > From jhuns at vt.edu Thu Nov 20 12:18:12 2008 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:18:12 -0500 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Call for Papers: STS Across Borders Graduate Student Conference In-Reply-To: References: <503D7B23-F996-4AF7-B49E-B984311CD46A@vt.edu> Message-ID: <9BF60011-8CA8-4BF0-9FAC-A40165BFB123@vt.edu> depends on who you ask. Science and technology studies or science and technology in society. From lk180 at columbia.edu Thu Nov 20 12:32:33 2008 From: lk180 at columbia.edu (Laleh Khalili) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:32:33 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Call for Papers: STS Across Borders Graduate Student Conference In-Reply-To: <9BF60011-8CA8-4BF0-9FAC-A40165BFB123@vt.edu> References: <503D7B23-F996-4AF7-B49E-B984311CD46A@vt.edu> <9BF60011-8CA8-4BF0-9FAC-A40165BFB123@vt.edu> Message-ID: Thank you! On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, jeremy hunsinger wrote: > depends on who you ask. Science and technology studies or science > and technology in society. > _______________________________________________ > Interpretationandmethods mailing list > Interpretationandmethods at listserv.cddc.vt.edu > http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/interpretationandmethods > > From c.epstein at usyd.edu.au Wed Nov 26 18:45:46 2008 From: c.epstein at usyd.edu.au (Charlotte Epstein) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:45:46 +1100 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] book announcement Message-ID: <19DAA7C72DFC334FBC4812AB5F7227030652C91C@MAIL2.mcs.usyd.edu.au> Dear All, Apologies for the self-promotion but this may be of interest to member of this list. It is essentially an engagement with both discourse theory and method within the discipline of International Relations. Kind regards Charlotte ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Power of Words in International Relations: Birth of an Anti-Whaling Discourse Charlotte Epstein In the second half of the twentieth century, worldwide attitudes toward whaling shifted from widespread acceptance to moral censure. Why? Whaling, once as important to the global economy as oil is now, had long been uneconomical. Major species were long known to be endangered. Yet nations had continued to support whaling. In The Power of Words in International Relations, Charlotte Epstein argues that the change was brought about not by changing material interests but by a powerful anti-whaling discourse that successfully recast whales as extraordinary and intelligent endangered mammals that needed to be saved. Epstein views whaling both as an object of analysis in its own right and as a lens for examining discursive power, and how language, materiality, and action interact to shape international relations. By focusing on discourse, she develops an approach to the study of agency and the construction of interests that brings non-state actors and individuals into the analysis of international politics. Epstein analyses the "society of whaling states" as a set of historical practices where the dominant discourse of the day legitimated the killing of whales rather than their protection. She then looks at this whaling world's mirror image: the rise from the political margins of an anti-whaling discourse, which orchestrated one of the first successful global environmental campaigns, in which saving the whales ultimately became shorthand for saving the planet. Finally, she considers the continued dominance of a now taken-for-granted anti-whaling discourse, including its creation of identity categories that align with and sustain the existing international political order. Epstein's synthesis of discourse, power, and identity politics brings the fields of international relations theory and global environmental politics into a fruitful dialogue that benefits both. Pb+ 344pp 9780262550697 $26/?16.95 A$51.95 NZ$64 2008.11 MIT Press http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11618 "According to mainstream international relations theory, states are not supposed to handle whaling the way they do. Epstein demonstrates how the discursive framing of the issue cannot be fully accounted for in terms of material interests and state-system characteristics. Drawing on the literature on identity and social movements, Epstein deftly demonstrates how social power is changing the face of global politics." -Iver B. Neumann, Senior Research Fellow, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs "Epstein powerfully demonstrates a vital aspect of social construction by focusing on a very material object, whales. In rejecting the dualism of the material and the ideal; analyzing how discourses structure the possible positions actors can take on an issue; and by demonstrating the power of norms to exclude as well as regulate, Epstein shows how whales were discursively transformed from commodities into social objects uniquely worthy of protection; and in doing so how an entire economic order was transformed. Empirically rich and theoretically sophisticated; weaving the theory through the cases and across levels of analysis, The Power of Words in International Relations is a tour de force." -Mark Blyth, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University "The Power of Words in International Relations interweaves nuanced theoretical analysis with a rich historical narrative. Behind the popular slogan, 'Save the Whales!' and the decades of political maneuvering both for and against it, lies a fascinating story about the co-construction of discursive and material practices. Charlotte Epstein has given us an outstanding case study about meaning-making at the intersection of science, politics, economics, and ethics. This book should find a wide audience in international relations, environmental studies, and the social studies of science." -Karen T. Litfin, Department of Political Science, University of Washington "If whales could read, Charlotte Epstein's The Power of Words in International Relations would be essential for them to understand why humans behave as they do. As it is, they cannot read but, to our good fortune, we can. Accordingly, we should pay close attention to what Epstein has to say about international relations, the global economy, history, environment, language, and action and make this book required reading for our students." -Ronnie D. Lipschutz, Professor of Politics, University of California, Santa Cruz Pb+ 344pp 9780262550697 A$51.95 NZ$64 2008.11 MIT Press Dr Charlotte Epstein Senior Lecturer Department of Government and International Relations School of Social and Political Sciences The University of Sydney Room 287 | Merewether Building (HO4) NSW 2006| Australia P 61 2 9351 2082 F 61 2 9351 3624 e c.epstein at usyd.edu.aul | w http://www.arts.usyd.edu.au/departs/government/staff/charlotte_epstein.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20081127/94c34cd8/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 4256 bytes Desc: image001.gif Url : http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20081127/94c34cd8/attachment-0001.gif From D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl Sat Nov 29 09:06:01 2008 From: D.Yanow at fsw.vu.nl (Dvora Yanow) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 15:06:01 +0100 Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] Announcing a new APSA Conference Group on Interpretive Methodologies and Methods Message-ID: <5286BEEC21FADA47A24AA92D8BC9270E016FDA91@fswmail01.scw.vu.nl> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20081129/052e297a/attachment.html