Stanford's open courses raise questions about true value of elite education | Inside Higher Ed:
'via Blog this'
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Saturday, April 14, 2012
Ecological Crises, Digital Humanities and New Political Assemblies--Lecture Notes
Following notes are by Ann Mary of Bruno Latour's talk on 23 March at, National Gallery of Modern Art, Bangalore on "Ecological Crises, Digital Humanities and New Political Assemblies"
-----------------
If an ecological debate occurs, it usually goes along the lines of “Nature” versus “technology”, “Humans” versus “The Planet” and so on.
This is because it is the “legitimate” (or the outsider’s) way of looking at the debate.This way of making sense of the issue stems from an unfamiliarity with practices of science.
(For example : In the climate gate fiasco of 2009, a big fuss was created over emails sent between scientists. To the extent that things were said along the lines of “Global warming is a conspiracy”. But for people who practice say, theoretical physics, it is a perfectly normal thing to produce “fact” based on email exchange)
These are a few myths he discussed:
1. That knowledge is produced in a scientific field as fact with no value.
2. There is an institution which decides the conditions under which truth can be produced in a scientific field.(Unlike “pure sciences”, law is an instance where the institution provides or sanctions “legal truths”)
To locate where these myths come, Latour looks at the core concept of Modern and its association with Nature. Both of these are associated with West.
The sanction for “the truth” of science comes from the concept of a Modern West.The locus of the Modern is the progress of reason over Nature, something which was the basis for the whole idea of studying other “cultures”.
Latour turns around this anthropology onto the modern itself.Latour questions the notion that “Nature” was a politically free category of fact finding which the modern Westerner engaged in. He states that within the practices of science, it becomes more obvious that there was no unique “natural” entity that could be studied without value judgements.
If Western “Modern” s basic assumption is called into question in practices, then how can we start making sense of entities by locating them within their “modes of existence”?(he isn’t referring to just physical objects, but concepts which have a legitimate way of being understood within their institutions : For example : Law and legal truths must be understood with reference to the conditions which sanction their legality,viz. the institution of law).
If Nature ceases to be the terrain where “objects” of study could be taken up, then how do we study and solve questions like ecological crises? In a debate on ecological crisis, it can no longer be said that “Nature” is the mediator of the debate.
Latour creates a project called Digital Humanities where ecological concerns must and can talk in the differences that exist at the levels in which groups/individuals have understood the “Modern” . The debate must threaten the “modernizing” project by calling into question the differences in the experience of modernity in practice.
(The whole lecture sounded like cultural studies in science. And when he was talking about diplomacy and resolution, U R Ananthamurthy mentioned another sense of conflict resol from Indian traditions. That the word “Upaya” meant “Tactic” with a sense of coming closer and also “metaphor”. Not a complete closure like the usual translation “Solution” suggests )
If anyone remembers what he said about the truth conditions of religion, please please do type it out here. I have been trying to remember desperately. He said something that the truth conditions for religion( I dont know if he was talking of Catholicism) was something..... about belief or human nature)
-----------------
If an ecological debate occurs, it usually goes along the lines of “Nature” versus “technology”, “Humans” versus “The Planet” and so on.
This is because it is the “legitimate” (or the outsider’s) way of looking at the debate.This way of making sense of the issue stems from an unfamiliarity with practices of science.
(For example : In the climate gate fiasco of 2009, a big fuss was created over emails sent between scientists. To the extent that things were said along the lines of “Global warming is a conspiracy”. But for people who practice say, theoretical physics, it is a perfectly normal thing to produce “fact” based on email exchange)
These are a few myths he discussed:
1. That knowledge is produced in a scientific field as fact with no value.
2. There is an institution which decides the conditions under which truth can be produced in a scientific field.(Unlike “pure sciences”, law is an instance where the institution provides or sanctions “legal truths”)
To locate where these myths come, Latour looks at the core concept of Modern and its association with Nature. Both of these are associated with West.
The sanction for “the truth” of science comes from the concept of a Modern West.The locus of the Modern is the progress of reason over Nature, something which was the basis for the whole idea of studying other “cultures”.
Latour turns around this anthropology onto the modern itself.Latour questions the notion that “Nature” was a politically free category of fact finding which the modern Westerner engaged in. He states that within the practices of science, it becomes more obvious that there was no unique “natural” entity that could be studied without value judgements.
If Western “Modern” s basic assumption is called into question in practices, then how can we start making sense of entities by locating them within their “modes of existence”?(he isn’t referring to just physical objects, but concepts which have a legitimate way of being understood within their institutions : For example : Law and legal truths must be understood with reference to the conditions which sanction their legality,viz. the institution of law).
If Nature ceases to be the terrain where “objects” of study could be taken up, then how do we study and solve questions like ecological crises? In a debate on ecological crisis, it can no longer be said that “Nature” is the mediator of the debate.
Latour creates a project called Digital Humanities where ecological concerns must and can talk in the differences that exist at the levels in which groups/individuals have understood the “Modern” . The debate must threaten the “modernizing” project by calling into question the differences in the experience of modernity in practice.
(The whole lecture sounded like cultural studies in science. And when he was talking about diplomacy and resolution, U R Ananthamurthy mentioned another sense of conflict resol from Indian traditions. That the word “Upaya” meant “Tactic” with a sense of coming closer and also “metaphor”. Not a complete closure like the usual translation “Solution” suggests )
If anyone remembers what he said about the truth conditions of religion, please please do type it out here. I have been trying to remember desperately. He said something that the truth conditions for religion( I dont know if he was talking of Catholicism) was something..... about belief or human nature)
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Topic/Thesis Statement/Hypothesis/Research Problem
Topic: It clarifies area. It does not indicate method of research
Thesis statement: Will emerge after literature.
Hypothesis: Assumption based on which you are doing your research in your research area
Research problem: What you are researching.
Monday, April 09, 2012
Tuesday, April 03, 2012
Sunday, April 01, 2012
Friday, March 30, 2012
Thursday, March 29, 2012
The Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate is a national effort aimed at strengthening the education doctorate, Ed.D. | The Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
National Conference on Interweaving Texts and Contexts – Pedagogical Strategies
Organised by Dept of Studies and Research in English
Tumkur
University, Tumkur Karntaka
30 April 2012
About
The Conference
It
is evident that a work of art earlier was examined in vacuum. But the
work of art has now evolved to attain a new nomenclature “Text”.
Thanks to the various insights contributed by theorists across the
world, the idea of Text in the recent developments in the theory of
textuality from Barthes to Belsey has posed challenges to the way
literary and non-literary texts are studied. In the light of this
debate, the Conference proposes to examine the possibility of a
preeminent context around a text or a context that assumes its shape
circumstantially.
Objectives
of the Conference
- To explore new critical idioms for the evaluation and reading of literary and non-literary texts
- To develop various perspectives for reading literatures
- To showcase and engage with new research which has been reflecting on these themes
Sub-themes
of the Conference
- Traditional approaches to text
- Textuality of History, History of Textuality
- Transition from Work to Text
- Text and Context
- Textuality as a research method
Call
for papers
Interested participants are
invited to present papers on any of the themes mentioned above. The
full papers and not the abstracts of the papers shall reach us by
20th April 2012, to the email id tuteng2011@gmail.com
to facilitate the publication and release of the proceedings (with
ISBN) on the day of the Conference.
Guidelines
for Paper Submission
- The entire paper must be in MS-Word document format.
- The length of the paper should not exceed 10 pages.
- Times New Roman 12 font, 1.5 line space and 1-inch margin all around.
- Send one hard copy and one soft copy of the paper to the Conference Convener.
- The papers will be evaluated on the basis of originality, research content, conceptual clarity, methodology, and presentation skills.
- Editorial Committee has the authority to review and select the papers for ISBN edited book.
Delegation
Fee
Delegates
|
Registration
Fee
|
| Academics and Research Scholars | Rs 400/- |
| Students | Rs 100/- |
The
Registration fee may be paid on the spot.
For
further details contact
Organizing
Secretary
Department
of Studies and Research in English
Dr.
P Sadnanda Maiya Block
Tumkur
University, Campus
B.H.Road,
Tumkur – 572103, Karnataka
E-mail-ID:
tuteng2011 AT gmail.com
Phone:
9900359280
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)