Cultural Theory 202
* All logs
*
? Previous activity
*
Chase the reference quizCultural Theory PowerpointList of topicsCultural theory project briefJump to...Culture matters - powerpointShort booklistThe Century of the SelfArticle on Simone de Beauvoir & feminismThe complexity revolution9.11 and the Global SpectacleJoseph Rowntree Foundation poverty report 2007Monty Python - postmodern philosophyMont Python on identityQueer theoryCopies and OriginalsStealing Heaven! (Neurotheology)Big Brother is watching youOrientalismfear of the managerCyberspace
*
Next activity ?
You are here
* Learning
* / ? SM202
* / ? Forums
* / ? Cultural Theory Spring 2008
* / ? digital culture
Help with Search (new window)
Picture of anthony watson
digital culture
by anthony watson - Wednesday, 9 January 2008, 09:06 PM
right hello all this is me gona start this off so here it goes, after the breifing session with julian today me and julian had a little talk about the rise in digital culture that is about at the moment, i feel this is not for the high class culture but more a culture for the people, with the rise of social networking site like myspace and facebook and also the rise of digital, music, film and tv and even to the extent of podcasts. so lets brake this down.
starting with digital music a couple of things that have been anounced today (9/1/08) itunes is lowering its cost of songs to match the rest of the E.U.
also the anouncment that copyright laws will change to deal with the change in digital use ( more infor at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7176538.stm )
this will allow us to put music onto our mp3 players legally. but what does this have to do with culture, well to me this has only come about as our culture has changed and the way we want to access and listen to our music has changed in some ways this is not only a change in technology but also how we use our music and music culture is very big and effects our lives hugely in the way we work and think and feel as human beings as music is around us all the time within our life.
with the film / t.v aspects im looking at the culture and people who use youtube. how that has effected how we as a audiance have now become the people who 'run' and decied to veiw our lives, it was anounced earlier this month that there is 8 hours of video put onto youtube per minuet. that shows how obsessed we have become of puting our lives onto the internet for all to see and comment and veiw opinions of us it is a cultureal aspect that has become huge. i am able to go to a gig and by the following day i can theareticly re live that experiance by re watching moments of that gig by watching peoples bootleg clips on youtube. we are now able to download and veiw tv and films through itunes, and services like 4OD. these services are avalble for us so we can watch the tv we love when and were we want, this in turn creates a conversation peice and from that things like quoteing and refrences to these films/ tv programes make a new comunity and culture that are we just being obsessed by a moveing picture with narative ?
think about that . . . . .
lastly i just want to quickly look at the rise of podcasts that is really quite a new thing in terms of technolagy, again its this culture of us in control. we can listen to our faverite radio show the day after on our way to work and pause it and come back to it at a later time or date. our faverite 'famus persinalitys' have there own podcasts and do extremly well from them for example ricky gervas who is constantly the no 1 downloaded podcast.
basicly what i think im trying to get at with this, the technology that is avalble to us and how accessable it is to us with a click of a button at most points we are able to develope a hole new culture that has embrased a new era were we can be in controll of what we want and when we want it. we are able to now within this cultureal invirment were we can big up or destroy the media that has been controlling our lives.
sorry ive witterd on here but i feel that theres alot of interesting points here and i hope you have taken these points in and starting to create your veiws please dicuss im interested in your veiws on this
Edit | Delete | Reply
Picture of Julian Bryant
Re: digital culture
by Julian Bryant - Monday, 14 January 2008, 05:23 PM
The problem with digital culture is how to access valid theory writing about it. I'm sure it's out there - all the stuff to do with Web2; digital arts; and so on. You could look at Marshall McLuhan on broadcasting - a similar thing. There's also a booklist on Amazon about digital performance.
The point to the project is to research what exprets are thinking about how this stuff works. Good Luck!
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of Kieron Vanstone
Re: digital culture
by Kieron Vanstone - Thursday, 17 January 2008, 03:54 PM
I think the idea of posting your life on youtube is an extremely postmodern view. In the early nineties a television show (loosely) called 'I'd do anything to be on telly' was a chance for the "average Joe" to get on telly by literally doing anything bonkers that would be entertaining. Youtube is the more accessible way of doing this and in theory it can be seen by even more people. Youtube has become a revolution in postmodernism because of its links with classic television.
k
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of john pullig
Re: digital culture
by john pullig - Thursday, 17 January 2008, 04:18 PM
Digital culture is a much wider subject than the media MP3, TV, Film and downloads to You Tube. As suggested in the thread, I have taken a look at the late Marshall McLuhan born in 1911 (so he was not quite up to speed on the modern digital age). But he is the inspiration for the Maastricht McLuhan Institute (MMI). Here http://www.mmi.unimaas.nl/ , I found Marshall McLuhan studied how new media such as printing brought fundamental shifts in emphasis on the structure (grammar), logic (dialectic) or effects (rhetoric) of language. McLuhan proposed thought provoking views on how radio and television were introducing new shifts. His student, Walter Ong, explored how these shifts also affected classification and presentation of knowledge. Today, MMI focuses on how Information and Communication Technology (ICT) will affect these shifts: how it is transforming our knowledge organisation and knowledge management, as well as its implications for culture and learning.
On the subject of what the experts are thinking and the sometimes very profound views that they put forward, a great quote from Marshall McLuhan and he had lots of them, seems oddly appropriate and it is this “Mud sometimes gives the illusion of depth.” What I have found is that some of these academic use language that makes their meaning as clear as mud.
On the subject You Tube downloads and why we want to put video clips of ourselves out there for all to see, I think that this supports Andy Worhol’s famous quote from1979 "...my prediction from the sixties finally came true: In the future everyone will be famous for fifteen minutes."(Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, 16th Ed., 1992 pub. Little, Brown & Co., p. 758:17 ).
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of Julian Bryant
Re: digital culture
by Julian Bryant - Thursday, 24 January 2008, 08:11 AM
I'm still pondering the theoretical aspects of the digital 'condition'. Phil suggested looking into the work of Lizbeth Goodman, now professor of digital stuff at UEL: http://www.smartlab.uk.com/1about/director.htm. There does seem to be some tip-over into game theory; interestingly, Lizbeth's work has also included studies of feminism and theatre.
I haven't read it, but the first reference on Amazon was Marcel O'Gorman's E-crit (University of Toronto, 2007): "O'Gorman explores the ways in which digital media might help to restore the critical, intellectual purpose of higher education, which has been repressed by the technocratic structures that dominate the modern university. He argues that the revolutionary, socio-critical impetus that spurred deconstructive theory and transformed the humanities was lost in the initial attempts to digitize the literary canon and demonstrate the convergence of critical theory and hypertext. Humanities disciplines, he suggests, must reposition themselves through the invention of humanities-based inter-disciplinary programs capable of adapting to the post-print vicissitudes of a digital culture. "E-Crit" is thus essential reading for anyone concerned with the practice - and future - of the humanities in higher education."
It's worth following some of these threads.
Since posting, I've just come across www.ted.com - a longstanding conference on Technology Entertainment Design. Contributions are in video format.
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of anthony watson
Re: digital culture
by anthony watson - Monday, 4 February 2008, 05:30 PM
ok ive been looking at all this not just my post but everyone that has writton something over the past few weeks, it has occored to me that all this talk of culture and post modenism means absolutly nothing. it has no real meaning or context. all these subjects are just a state of mind and is whatever you want the 'culture' to be the theorys that 'back up' our points are in the end just someone elses opinion but because these are people that are respected within the world and peoples eyes that in turn just makes this special and right but all in all its just a opinion who knows if i become well known in years to come what ive writton on this forem will that become a theory what i say is that not just a theory because im a student learning does that make my words wrong because im not relating it back to some other persons ideas, is that right ? does that makei ti right to let someone else tell you how to act, write, think and progress onto other levals
is it o.k or right to do so ?
i dont think it is at the end of the day just because we live in a 'culture' but what really is the culture we talk about because it seems to me that none of us know whitch 'culture' we are on about its not like that we've all sat and wrote about the same thing the same attention, no we've all writton about other peoples veiws beacuse thats what is expected of us to get the grade, to progress. none of us are right, none of us know the answer to the question, because there is no answer to this or anything, we all form a opinion from a series of 'facts' what is real none of us know. we all form a opinion some match some dont.
im gona stop this now, i leave you with this
'It's making me tense when you're telling me
It's just the facts that don't compute the classic way
I guess I'm wrong again anyway'
ok sighning off on my last post whitch will probally make me fail this but hell it was worth the shot
goodbye one and all and thanks for reading
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of Julian Bryant
Re: digital culture
by Julian Bryant - Wednesday, 6 February 2008, 07:08 PM
You'll be glad to know you've been indulging in epistemology - the study of knowledge. There's a difference between opinion (which may be well or ill founded); judgement; knowledge; and wisdom. Its almost a hierarchy. Right or wrong exists in a different dimension, and it's usually based on a set of value judgements.
IMHO, postmodernism tries to undermine those who assume their opinion / knowledge is right, and base their social/political standing on their claim to 'true' knowledge. HOWEVER, and its a big one which is why I was shouting, there issuch a thing as scientific method, when applied to philosophy like this it is an attempt to reach an objective position; by means of being self-rigorous, and by peer criticism. It is a value I still hold dear, while recognising there may be limitations.
Does this help your dilemma?
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of anthony watson
Re: digital culture
by anthony watson - Thursday, 7 February 2008, 11:46 AM
to me im still stuck in this rut of a opinion or knowledge is still a opinion but it is the fact of the hirerachy that makes this ' knowledge ' right. to me it is a case that methords are just a opinion from someone who is respected ok there is reserch involved but the have formed a opinion that is justified but because of there 'wisdom' or 'true knowledge' does this really justify the way we should look at the world and view or learning experiance it restricts everything we do. it holds us to a structure that does not let us evolve and change to improve our learning experiances and to relate this back to 'digital culture' if this was completly fixed to a set of views and thoerys would it be as strong as it is ?
i just feel it resricts the learning and us as people as a species.
im not saying there is a right or wrong or there is no true facts, it is the point that theorys are a opinion that someone has formed
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of Kieron Vanstone
Re: digital culture
by Kieron Vanstone - Thursday, 7 February 2008, 01:15 PM
IMHO: In My Humble Opinion. LMAO
I think the "rut" that Anthony seems to be stuck in lies somewhere between Positive Epistemology and Constructionist Epistemelogy.
Throughout our entire academic careers we have forever been taught to back up our ideas and opinions with quotes and references to support what we say. This is Positive Epistemology and is a much more structured way of learning. Changingminds.org states that it is the "MANAGEMENT of facts (which are poven, true pieces of knowledge)" As Stage MANAGERS i think that this is particularly relevant to how we work within the theatre. For example, we use lectures/theory in Management Theory to improve how we communicate; we take what we know already (opinion): my own on writing an email was that you could convey any meaning as long as it was worded correctly. However, when i took onboard Richard's theories on communicating in email (a true piece of knowledge) it is always possible that the 'receiver' can misinterprate the 'transmitter'. By taking onboard this layer of knowledge i will change the way i communicate in email; by being more formal and succinct i can transmit my message in a clear and functional way so that the content is succinct.
With reference to my post on Cyberspace i mention how writing on a forum is a much more free and expressive form of academia. This type of education is called Constructionist Epistemology. According to changingminds.org for Constructionist Epistemolgists it is to "consider that knowledge is constructed internally rather than being discovered externally" and that "there is not 'one true knowledge' about things."
Taking the example of email communication again i would consider both my Positive and Constructionist Epistemology to create a rounded, and hopefully, more user friendly form of linguistics and syntax in my email. For example, the first time i would send an email to a new 'receiver' i would address it with "Dear ..." (here comes the important part); depending on the response/Feedback i would then address the email with either "Dear ..." again or "Hi ..." Using both Positive and Constructionist Epistemology i will hopefully have improved my communication.
In a roundabout way, what im trying to say in response to Anthony's dilemma is that we now as adults have to learn to use both types of learning. Some may say by giving our own opinion is like going back to our youth when we would constantly give opinion with no reference. I am now relishing the idea that we get to bring both types of learning to our studies. As a lecturer im sure that is why "it is a value i still hold dear" for Julian because it is a chance for us as students to broaden our experiences as theorists ourselves.
K
I know i sent this website out to you guys before but i cant recommend www.changingminds.org enough. This was my main reference for this post.
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of anthony watson
Re: digital culture
by anthony watson - Friday, 8 February 2008, 04:25 PM
i still debateing this after a conversation with julian yesterday i dont think or feel i will ever be happy with these theorys or the whole idea
i feel that everyone on here is searching for something that does not exist. i lost heart in this a while ago, i am very scepticle about the whole way we as a group are posting on here i am becoming very frustrated of the process and how people have been discussing the subject.
look and judge and question
you might see my perspective
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
You are logged in as Julian Bryant (Logout)
SM202
Moodle Docs for this page
* All logs
*
? Previous activity
*
Chase the reference quizCultural Theory PowerpointList of topicsCultural theory project briefJump to...Culture matters - powerpointShort booklistThe Century of the SelfArticle on Simone de Beauvoir & feminismThe complexity revolution9.11 and the Global SpectacleJoseph Rowntree Foundation poverty report 2007Monty Python - postmodern philosophyMont Python on identityQueer theoryCopies and OriginalsStealing Heaven! (Neurotheology)Big Brother is watching youOrientalismfear of the managerCyberspace
*
Next activity ?
You are here
* Learning
* / ? SM202
* / ? Forums
* / ? Cultural Theory Spring 2008
* / ? digital culture
Help with Search (new window)
Picture of anthony watson
digital culture
by anthony watson - Wednesday, 9 January 2008, 09:06 PM
right hello all this is me gona start this off so here it goes, after the breifing session with julian today me and julian had a little talk about the rise in digital culture that is about at the moment, i feel this is not for the high class culture but more a culture for the people, with the rise of social networking site like myspace and facebook and also the rise of digital, music, film and tv and even to the extent of podcasts. so lets brake this down.
starting with digital music a couple of things that have been anounced today (9/1/08) itunes is lowering its cost of songs to match the rest of the E.U.
also the anouncment that copyright laws will change to deal with the change in digital use ( more infor at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7176538.stm )
this will allow us to put music onto our mp3 players legally. but what does this have to do with culture, well to me this has only come about as our culture has changed and the way we want to access and listen to our music has changed in some ways this is not only a change in technology but also how we use our music and music culture is very big and effects our lives hugely in the way we work and think and feel as human beings as music is around us all the time within our life.
with the film / t.v aspects im looking at the culture and people who use youtube. how that has effected how we as a audiance have now become the people who 'run' and decied to veiw our lives, it was anounced earlier this month that there is 8 hours of video put onto youtube per minuet. that shows how obsessed we have become of puting our lives onto the internet for all to see and comment and veiw opinions of us it is a cultureal aspect that has become huge. i am able to go to a gig and by the following day i can theareticly re live that experiance by re watching moments of that gig by watching peoples bootleg clips on youtube. we are now able to download and veiw tv and films through itunes, and services like 4OD. these services are avalble for us so we can watch the tv we love when and were we want, this in turn creates a conversation peice and from that things like quoteing and refrences to these films/ tv programes make a new comunity and culture that are we just being obsessed by a moveing picture with narative ?
think about that . . . . .
lastly i just want to quickly look at the rise of podcasts that is really quite a new thing in terms of technolagy, again its this culture of us in control. we can listen to our faverite radio show the day after on our way to work and pause it and come back to it at a later time or date. our faverite 'famus persinalitys' have there own podcasts and do extremly well from them for example ricky gervas who is constantly the no 1 downloaded podcast.
basicly what i think im trying to get at with this, the technology that is avalble to us and how accessable it is to us with a click of a button at most points we are able to develope a hole new culture that has embrased a new era were we can be in controll of what we want and when we want it. we are able to now within this cultureal invirment were we can big up or destroy the media that has been controlling our lives.
sorry ive witterd on here but i feel that theres alot of interesting points here and i hope you have taken these points in and starting to create your veiws please dicuss im interested in your veiws on this
Edit | Delete | Reply
Picture of Julian Bryant
Re: digital culture
by Julian Bryant - Monday, 14 January 2008, 05:23 PM
The problem with digital culture is how to access valid theory writing about it. I'm sure it's out there - all the stuff to do with Web2; digital arts; and so on. You could look at Marshall McLuhan on broadcasting - a similar thing. There's also a booklist on Amazon about digital performance.
The point to the project is to research what exprets are thinking about how this stuff works. Good Luck!
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of Kieron Vanstone
Re: digital culture
by Kieron Vanstone - Thursday, 17 January 2008, 03:54 PM
I think the idea of posting your life on youtube is an extremely postmodern view. In the early nineties a television show (loosely) called 'I'd do anything to be on telly' was a chance for the "average Joe" to get on telly by literally doing anything bonkers that would be entertaining. Youtube is the more accessible way of doing this and in theory it can be seen by even more people. Youtube has become a revolution in postmodernism because of its links with classic television.
k
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of john pullig
Re: digital culture
by john pullig - Thursday, 17 January 2008, 04:18 PM
Digital culture is a much wider subject than the media MP3, TV, Film and downloads to You Tube. As suggested in the thread, I have taken a look at the late Marshall McLuhan born in 1911 (so he was not quite up to speed on the modern digital age). But he is the inspiration for the Maastricht McLuhan Institute (MMI). Here http://www.mmi.unimaas.nl/ , I found Marshall McLuhan studied how new media such as printing brought fundamental shifts in emphasis on the structure (grammar), logic (dialectic) or effects (rhetoric) of language. McLuhan proposed thought provoking views on how radio and television were introducing new shifts. His student, Walter Ong, explored how these shifts also affected classification and presentation of knowledge. Today, MMI focuses on how Information and Communication Technology (ICT) will affect these shifts: how it is transforming our knowledge organisation and knowledge management, as well as its implications for culture and learning.
On the subject of what the experts are thinking and the sometimes very profound views that they put forward, a great quote from Marshall McLuhan and he had lots of them, seems oddly appropriate and it is this “Mud sometimes gives the illusion of depth.” What I have found is that some of these academic use language that makes their meaning as clear as mud.
On the subject You Tube downloads and why we want to put video clips of ourselves out there for all to see, I think that this supports Andy Worhol’s famous quote from1979 "...my prediction from the sixties finally came true: In the future everyone will be famous for fifteen minutes."(Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, 16th Ed., 1992 pub. Little, Brown & Co., p. 758:17 ).
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of Julian Bryant
Re: digital culture
by Julian Bryant - Thursday, 24 January 2008, 08:11 AM
I'm still pondering the theoretical aspects of the digital 'condition'. Phil suggested looking into the work of Lizbeth Goodman, now professor of digital stuff at UEL: http://www.smartlab.uk.com/1about/director.htm. There does seem to be some tip-over into game theory; interestingly, Lizbeth's work has also included studies of feminism and theatre.
I haven't read it, but the first reference on Amazon was Marcel O'Gorman's E-crit (University of Toronto, 2007): "O'Gorman explores the ways in which digital media might help to restore the critical, intellectual purpose of higher education, which has been repressed by the technocratic structures that dominate the modern university. He argues that the revolutionary, socio-critical impetus that spurred deconstructive theory and transformed the humanities was lost in the initial attempts to digitize the literary canon and demonstrate the convergence of critical theory and hypertext. Humanities disciplines, he suggests, must reposition themselves through the invention of humanities-based inter-disciplinary programs capable of adapting to the post-print vicissitudes of a digital culture. "E-Crit" is thus essential reading for anyone concerned with the practice - and future - of the humanities in higher education."
It's worth following some of these threads.
Since posting, I've just come across www.ted.com - a longstanding conference on Technology Entertainment Design. Contributions are in video format.
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of anthony watson
Re: digital culture
by anthony watson - Monday, 4 February 2008, 05:30 PM
ok ive been looking at all this not just my post but everyone that has writton something over the past few weeks, it has occored to me that all this talk of culture and post modenism means absolutly nothing. it has no real meaning or context. all these subjects are just a state of mind and is whatever you want the 'culture' to be the theorys that 'back up' our points are in the end just someone elses opinion but because these are people that are respected within the world and peoples eyes that in turn just makes this special and right but all in all its just a opinion who knows if i become well known in years to come what ive writton on this forem will that become a theory what i say is that not just a theory because im a student learning does that make my words wrong because im not relating it back to some other persons ideas, is that right ? does that makei ti right to let someone else tell you how to act, write, think and progress onto other levals
is it o.k or right to do so ?
i dont think it is at the end of the day just because we live in a 'culture' but what really is the culture we talk about because it seems to me that none of us know whitch 'culture' we are on about its not like that we've all sat and wrote about the same thing the same attention, no we've all writton about other peoples veiws beacuse thats what is expected of us to get the grade, to progress. none of us are right, none of us know the answer to the question, because there is no answer to this or anything, we all form a opinion from a series of 'facts' what is real none of us know. we all form a opinion some match some dont.
im gona stop this now, i leave you with this
'It's making me tense when you're telling me
It's just the facts that don't compute the classic way
I guess I'm wrong again anyway'
ok sighning off on my last post whitch will probally make me fail this but hell it was worth the shot
goodbye one and all and thanks for reading
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of Julian Bryant
Re: digital culture
by Julian Bryant - Wednesday, 6 February 2008, 07:08 PM
You'll be glad to know you've been indulging in epistemology - the study of knowledge. There's a difference between opinion (which may be well or ill founded); judgement; knowledge; and wisdom. Its almost a hierarchy. Right or wrong exists in a different dimension, and it's usually based on a set of value judgements.
IMHO, postmodernism tries to undermine those who assume their opinion / knowledge is right, and base their social/political standing on their claim to 'true' knowledge. HOWEVER, and its a big one which is why I was shouting, there issuch a thing as scientific method, when applied to philosophy like this it is an attempt to reach an objective position; by means of being self-rigorous, and by peer criticism. It is a value I still hold dear, while recognising there may be limitations.
Does this help your dilemma?
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of anthony watson
Re: digital culture
by anthony watson - Thursday, 7 February 2008, 11:46 AM
to me im still stuck in this rut of a opinion or knowledge is still a opinion but it is the fact of the hirerachy that makes this ' knowledge ' right. to me it is a case that methords are just a opinion from someone who is respected ok there is reserch involved but the have formed a opinion that is justified but because of there 'wisdom' or 'true knowledge' does this really justify the way we should look at the world and view or learning experiance it restricts everything we do. it holds us to a structure that does not let us evolve and change to improve our learning experiances and to relate this back to 'digital culture' if this was completly fixed to a set of views and thoerys would it be as strong as it is ?
i just feel it resricts the learning and us as people as a species.
im not saying there is a right or wrong or there is no true facts, it is the point that theorys are a opinion that someone has formed
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of Kieron Vanstone
Re: digital culture
by Kieron Vanstone - Thursday, 7 February 2008, 01:15 PM
IMHO: In My Humble Opinion. LMAO
I think the "rut" that Anthony seems to be stuck in lies somewhere between Positive Epistemology and Constructionist Epistemelogy.
Throughout our entire academic careers we have forever been taught to back up our ideas and opinions with quotes and references to support what we say. This is Positive Epistemology and is a much more structured way of learning. Changingminds.org states that it is the "MANAGEMENT of facts (which are poven, true pieces of knowledge)" As Stage MANAGERS i think that this is particularly relevant to how we work within the theatre. For example, we use lectures/theory in Management Theory to improve how we communicate; we take what we know already (opinion): my own on writing an email was that you could convey any meaning as long as it was worded correctly. However, when i took onboard Richard's theories on communicating in email (a true piece of knowledge) it is always possible that the 'receiver' can misinterprate the 'transmitter'. By taking onboard this layer of knowledge i will change the way i communicate in email; by being more formal and succinct i can transmit my message in a clear and functional way so that the content is succinct.
With reference to my post on Cyberspace i mention how writing on a forum is a much more free and expressive form of academia. This type of education is called Constructionist Epistemology. According to changingminds.org for Constructionist Epistemolgists it is to "consider that knowledge is constructed internally rather than being discovered externally" and that "there is not 'one true knowledge' about things."
Taking the example of email communication again i would consider both my Positive and Constructionist Epistemology to create a rounded, and hopefully, more user friendly form of linguistics and syntax in my email. For example, the first time i would send an email to a new 'receiver' i would address it with "Dear ..." (here comes the important part); depending on the response/Feedback i would then address the email with either "Dear ..." again or "Hi ..." Using both Positive and Constructionist Epistemology i will hopefully have improved my communication.
In a roundabout way, what im trying to say in response to Anthony's dilemma is that we now as adults have to learn to use both types of learning. Some may say by giving our own opinion is like going back to our youth when we would constantly give opinion with no reference. I am now relishing the idea that we get to bring both types of learning to our studies. As a lecturer im sure that is why "it is a value i still hold dear" for Julian because it is a chance for us as students to broaden our experiences as theorists ourselves.
K
I know i sent this website out to you guys before but i cant recommend www.changingminds.org enough. This was my main reference for this post.
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
Picture of anthony watson
Re: digital culture
by anthony watson - Friday, 8 February 2008, 04:25 PM
i still debateing this after a conversation with julian yesterday i dont think or feel i will ever be happy with these theorys or the whole idea
i feel that everyone on here is searching for something that does not exist. i lost heart in this a while ago, i am very scepticle about the whole way we as a group are posting on here i am becoming very frustrated of the process and how people have been discussing the subject.
look and judge and question
you might see my perspective
Show parent | Edit | Split | Delete | Reply
You are logged in as Julian Bryant (Logout)
SM202
Moodle Docs for this page
Last modified: Thursday, 7 June 2012, 2:15 PM