A suggestion : Start thinking in a completely different ways. Use diffractive reading, writing and researching to find new approaches. We need it.
Some sources : Three Minute Theory: What is Intra-Action? An introduction to Karen Barad's concept of "intra-action. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0SnstJoEec Iris van der Tuin, Reading Diffractive Reading: Where and When Does Diffraction Happen? https://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jep/3336451.0019.205?view= text;rgn=main A "concreet example" Down the methodological rabbit hole : thinking diffractively with resistant data. http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=3184&context=sspapers Best Annie Abrahams On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 5:33 PM, John Hopkins <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Brian for introducing Earth Systems ideas, they go a long way > towards an understanding of the connectedness across the wide scale of the > entire planet from an approach that is understandable to a literate > Westerner. There is a lot of new, creative, and very pertinent science > happening within that sphere, related to stories of deep-time pasts and > futures, in which we are scaled more to the global glitch that we are, > despite our propagation of globe-girdling effects. James G. Miller's work > dove-tails with this and may be of interest to you. As well, for example, > Franesco Gonella's piece "Systems thinking and the narrative of climate > change" http://prosperouswaydown.com/gonella-systems-climate/ might be of > interest. (I append a short selected bibliography of some other sources) > > Latour suggests that 'things' be related by negotiation. I believe that > his presumptive objectification of nature ('that-which-we-perceive') as a > set of 'things' continues the travesty of Cartesian disconnect that brought > us to where we are in the moment. > > The essence of the 'connectivity' between *everything* is not a > language-based negotiation. It pertains more to the energized relation and > an awareness (almost a dis-awareness!) of those flows. Definitely > pre-verbal to our English descriptive system. > > Any 'solutions' that are based in the model of 'relations of things' > (species, environments, ecosystems, regimes) and so imagined by/through > their thing-ness (which includes most scientific processes) are bound to > fail, as we so-far witness. Not only that, but the solutions are too often > framed even by eco-conscious folks as a catastrophe to *us-things*. Perhaps > if science proceeded on the assumption that all is connected, then created > hypotheses to disprove that assumption... > > Unfortunately our language restricts the essence of the discussion to > thing-ness -- it permeates all discourse (including the John Tresch article > about Latour). Using terms like 'assembled body', 'assemblage', 'agent', > even, 'apocalyptic', keeps us mired in the self-limiting and impotent > thing-ness of our realities, our histories, and our futures. Even Latour's > ANT which suggested the possibility of fluid connection between the actors, > remained mired in the defined material-ness of those objects, and did not, > imho, delve into the (energized) flow that both makes them up and > permeates, *is* the interstitial dynamic. > > Where is change? It is deeply internal. If it is not rooted there, it will > not propagate to wider systems. I agree, Brian, *that* is the most > diffucult issue. > > The suggestion in the article of a return to an understanding by "granting > epistemic weight to the natures of indigenous collectives" need be driven > by adopting their language for circumscribing reality. Other models of > reality may be adopted or at least studied, as they may provide mental > tools and the mental re-wiring necessary to let go of the materiality that > makes capitalism and our 'indigenous' world-view such a (stupidly) > compelling model -- one that most people take for reality itself. Of course > this poses the crucial question of how people approach reality -- most, it > seems, simply adopt what the dominant social order provides ('it's always > been that way'). What is first necessary is the development of a creative > milieu that points out explicitly that the social order is constructed on > models, and the models are *not* the phenomena of reality itself. Fluid and > pre/non-disciplinary creative learning situations are what need to > undergird any art/acience/politics question. One's own awareness of reality > may then possibly be developed in such a way that the connectedness is > forgrounded. If your program in NL is doing that, Eric, good on ya'! > > anyway. > > JH > > > On 09/Dec/17 00:48, Brian Holmes wrote: > >> This is a great discussion! CAE just wrote this: >> > > > A selected bibliography: > > Abraham, Terry. “Archives and Entropy: The Closed System,” February 1999. > http://www.uiweb.uidaho.edu/special-collections/papers/entropy.htm. > > Al-Fedaghi, Sabah S. “Systems of Things That Flow.” Proceedings of the > 52nd Annual Meeting of the ISSS, July 2008. > > Alter, Steven. “A General, Yet Useful Theory of Information Systems.” > Communications of Association for Information Systems 1 (March 1999). > > Bailey, Kenneth D. “Living Systems Theory and Social Entropy Theory.” > Systems Research and Behavioral Science 23 (2006): 291–300. > https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.738. > > Bertalanffy, Ludwig von. Organismic Psychology and Systems Theory. Boston, > MA: Clark University Press, 1968. > > ———. Perspectives on General System Theory: Scientific-Philosophical > Studies. The International Library of Systems Theory and Philosophy. New > York: G. Braziller, 1975. > > Biggart, John, ed. Alexander Bogdanov and the Origins of Systems Thinking > in Russia. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 1998. > > Farnsworth, Keith D., John Nelson, and Carlos Gershenson. “Living Is > Information Processing; from Molecules to Global Systems.,” October 22, > 2012. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1210.5908.pdf. > > Fuchs, Christian, and Wolfgang Hofkirchner. “Autopoiesis and Critical > Social Systems Theory.” In Autopoiesis in Organization Theory and Practice, > edited by Rodrigo Magalhães. Bingley,: Emerald, 2009. > > Gonella, Francesco. “Systems Thinking and the Narrative of Climate Change > – A Prosperous Way Down.” Blog. A Prosperous Way Down, July 23, 2017. > http://prosperouswaydown.com/gonella-systems-climate/. > > Meadows, Donella H. Thinking In Systems: A Primer. Edited by Diana Wright. > White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green, 2008. > > Miller, James G. “Living Systems: *17 Articles Together*.” Behavioral > Science 10, no. 4 (October 1, 1965). > > ———. “Living Systems: Basic Concepts.” Behavioral Science 10, no. 3 (July > 1, 1965): 193–237. > > ———. “Living Systems: Cross-Level Hypotheses.” Behavioral Science 10, no. > 4 (October 1, 1965): 380–411. > > ———. “Living Systems: Structure and Process.” Behavioral Science 10, no. 4 > (October 1, 1965): 337–79. > > Mulej, Matjaz, Zdenka Zenko, Vojko Potocan, Stefan Kajzer, and Stuart > Umpleby. “(The System Of) Seven Basic Groups Of Systems Thinking Principles > And Eight Basic Assumptions Of A General Theory Of Systems.” Journal of > Sociocybernetics 4, no. 2 (Fall/Winter 2003): 23–37. > > “Systems, Controls, and Information.” In Net Works: Case Studies in Web > Art and Design. New York ; London: Routledge, 2012. > > Viskovatoff, A. “Foundations of Niklas Luhmann’s Theory of Social > Systems.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 29, no. 4 (December 1, 1999): > 481–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/004839319902900402. > > Wenger, Win. “A General Theory of Systems: One Man’s View WIthin Our > Universe,” 1996. > > > -- > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Dr. John Hopkins, BSc, MFA, PhD > hanging on to the Laramide Orogeny > twitter: @neoscenes > http://tech-no-mad.net/blog/ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected] > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: > -- Ours Lingages documentation <https://aabrahams.wordpress.com/2017/10/31/ours-lingages-documentation/>: *video trailer,* full edit, script and more. Annie Abrahams, Daniel Pinheiro, Isabel Costa, Igor Stromajer, Outranspo - Lily Robert-Foley - Camille Bloomfield - Jonathan Baillehache, Jan de Weille, Rui Torres, Helen Varley Jamieson, Anna Tolkacheva and the readingclub.fr. *Interview* Addictive behaviours Interview with Artist Annie Abrahams <http://www.furtherfield.org/addictive-behaviours-interview-artist-annie-abrahams/> by Ruth Catlow and Marc Garrett for *Furtherfield.*
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected] # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
