Francis Hallé ,auteur d'un plaidoyer pour l'arbre est botaniste et initiateur de la mission ' Radeau des Cimes ' au -dessus de la canopée tropicale qu'il survole:

http://www.radeau-des-cimes.org/02/expe.htm

Loin des tumultes animales et mobiles ,l'arbre immobile et enraciné domine le temps; on le dit immortel !

Quelle fantastique créature , quelle beauté ,quelle plongée symbolique !

Que la contemplation est puissante quand toutes les théories modernes nous vantent la mobilité !

Seuls regrets,seules amertumes et pas des moindres :

-le site du 'radeau des cimes ' est des plus convenus et des plus mornes comme si vouloir sauver les arbres avaient nécessairement un air clinique avec ses images lisses et, ce ton policé de scientifiques chevronnés.

- la mission " radeau des cimes " et ses généreux donateurs ,ses mécènes provenant des laboratoires pharmaceutiques,des industries chimiques et de la Multinationale Total , vous savez ce major de pétrole qui salope les côtes et se fait le champion de la biodiversité écologique, rendent perplexes sur l'indépendance des chercheurs, et leur intégrité intellectuelle.

Ce qui après la plongée hors-du-temps nous ramène à la triste réalité politique .
Un seul hêtre vous manque et tout est dé-peupleraie!

]]> http://utopiens.wordpress.com/2008/01/17/29/ Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:44:23 +0000 MoE Da http://utopiens.wordpress.com/2008/01/17/29/ L'Affaire Total illustre à merveille cette citation de Michael Crichton,auteur de science fiction et de plusieurs séries TV populaires :

" Notre imprudence aveugle se joindra à notre puissance technologique pour produire ses effets dévastateurs .."

Total : une "faute d'imprudence" à 192 M d'euros
Les avocats de Total vont d'abord lire attentivement les 278 pages du jugement rendu par le tribunal correctionnel de Paris avant de décider s'ils font appel. La compagnie pétrolière a été jugée hier "imprudente" d'avoir loué un bateau "corrodé" dont le naufrage en décembre 1999 dans le golfe de Gascogne avait répandu 20 000 tonnes de fioul lourd sur 400 km de côtes françaises. A ce titre, elle est condamnée à verser solidairement avec le propriétaire du navire et la société de classification Rina 192 millions d'euros aux parties civiles. En 2006, la multinationale avait affiché des bénéfices record de 12,6 milliards euros.

Io intanto mi informo in rete.

ciao
smart

Já reparei que o "scripting" é algum muito mais além do que simples programação de circunstância. Fazer um script é uma mistura entre trabalho artesanal e uma forma de arte esotérica.

É uma ferramenta grosseira para brilhantemente juntar "qualquer coisa" com um bonito nó.

Por mais complexo que seja, consegue uma simplicidade pura.

Enfim. Uma diferente forma de arte.

Encontrei na net um artigo a falar de uma buzzword bem recente. Grid Computing. Sinceramente, ainda não entendi a 100% todo o seu panorama. Do que entendi do conceito, ainda falta justificar alguns detalhes. Por exemplo, como se pode aplicar no "mundo real". Na perspectiva do "utilizador doméstico". Mas isso fica para outra conversa.

Na prática, fiquei bastante interessado na segunda metade do artigo onde se fala da virtualização. De facto, a virtualização tem sido já há alguns tempos um mercado em expansão. Achei bastante curiosa a ideia de "servers for rental", onde se alugaria uma máquina virtual numa base por dia ou algo parecido. Isto, extrapolado numa rede de distribuição de dados, torna-se algo brutalmente valioso. Fortes detalhes como políticas de backups ou alocação de espaço físico para os bastidores, ficam susceptíveis a profundas alterações à sua engenharia.

Em suma, algo a ter em elevada atenção nos próximos tempos.

HAMMERFEST: Technology, Being and Self - Re-imagining the films of RW Paul in Heideggerian Context

A collaboration between hybrid arts collective I Am The Mighty Jungulator and writer Stephen Ireland, Hammerfest is an innovative re-imagining of the films of RW Paul, the English pioneer of early silent-cinema. Using material from Paul’s films and featuring an original IATMJ score, Hammerfest explores Paul’s work in the context of the environmental crisis, the philosophy of Martin Heidegger, and the folk tale Snow White, simultaneously telling the story of Tunte and Techné, workers at the Snøhvit gas liquefaction plant in Hammerfest, Norway. Hammerfest fuses performance with document, featuring live narration and Kosmiche musical accompaniment, to develop Paul’s work into a metaphor for humankind’s narcissistic relationship with the natural world. Rendering human beings’ seemingly fatal embrace of technology as a theme that blurs and transcends fictional boundaries, Hammerfest is an unique blend of film, philosophy, literature and music.

The world premiere of Hammerfest took place on Friday May 23rd at the Rock School Barbey in Bordeaux. The film was accompanied by live narration from Ina Hume and Stephen Ireland, live music by Matthew Olden and David Leavesley of IATMJ with Nathan Hughes, also of IATMJ, VJing. The Sacrament of the Cube was performed by the Freebase Fighter.

The UK premiere of Hammerfest is due to take place on June 8th at the Arnolfini Auditorium, Bristol as part of the Venn Festival.

Atenção:

Estão abertas as matrículas para os cursos intensivos na ESCOLA DE CINEMA.

TODOS os cursos são ministrados por professores EXPERIENTES em filmes de longa, curta e média metragem,  além de integrantes da equipe do longa metragem SEM FIO.  São cursos excepcionais que ensinam o aluno através da prática, colocando a mão na massa mesmo!

As disciplinas são:

Fotografia, Som, Roteiro, Produção, Direção, Atuação para Cinema, Edição e Prática de SET.

Informações detalhadas podem ser obtidas através do site:  www.escoladecinema.com.br

Restam poucas vagas.

legítimo.legítimo.legítimo.legítimo.legítimo.legítimo.legítimo

L'Italie a connu, il y a quelques années, une réforme de l'Université comme celle qui advint en France et qui se poursuit aujourd'hui ( cf Faust à Harvard

http://utopiens.wordpress.com/2008/02/18/faust-a-harvard/ )
Dans le contexte de l'époque, plus imaginatif, plus avisé,plus élevé j'ai retrouvé ce manifeste pour une auto-réforme de l'Université de Turin revendiquée par les étudiants datant de 2006( unilotta) que me plaît et que j'entends partager.

"NOUS VOULONS ETUDIER LENTEMENT !" Quel programme intransigeant !Quelle belle revendication!

Manifeste pour l'autoréforme de l'université
par le Collectif Universitaire Autonome de Turin

Après les semaines de mobilisations, ocupations, blocage de l'activité didactique, défilés, et après la grande manifestation du 25 octobre 2005 qui a assiégé le Parlement, nous, étudiants et étudiantes, précaires de l'université et de la connaissance, nous nous sommes rencontrés pour réfléchir sur les perspectives du mouvement. L'inacceptable approvation du Ddl n'a pas tué notre détermination à poursuivre la mobilisation. La protestation est née de notre préoccupation en attaquant le processus globalisateur qu'est en train de prendre notre université et notre formation. A l'origine de cette préoccupation, il y a le processus de précarisation et de réforme. Ce processus n'est que le "3+2" [1] et le mécanisme des "crédits", introduit par la gauche et aggravé par la droite.
Selon nous, être contre le Ddl signifie être contre le procès de réforme que l'université italienne a connu pendant les dernières années.
Depuis le début, les occupations et les mobilisations ont été des laboratoires d'expérimentation de nouvelles et nombreuses pratiques de lutte, de démolition du système universitaire actuel, et de construction immédiate d'une nouvelle université. A travers notre lutte nous avons commencé à écrire l'autoréforme de l'université. Ce manifeste réunit les pratiques et les contenus résultant des mobilisations.

1. Nous avons repris nos temps et nos espaces à travers le blocage de l'activité didactique, à travers une diminution de la présence en cours, et à travers les occupations et autogestions. En effet notre temps de vie et de formation ne sont pas compatibles avec le carcan des rythmes qui nous sont imposés. Le temps de l'université doit s'adapter à notre temps. Nous voulons une diminution radicale des rythmes d'étude et nous refusons l'obligation de présence en cours.
NOUS VOULONS ETUDIER LENTEMENT.

2. Nous sommes en train de reprendre ce qu'on veut nous enlever : pratiques diffuses d'autoréduction du repas à la cantine, du coût des transports, des services culturels, des loyers, occupations des institutions pour le droit à l'étude, libre diffusion de la connaissance menacée par les copyrights. Dans le marché de la formation, ils veulent nous destiner à un présent et à un futur de précarité. Nous réclamons des revenus, des services et des maisons, un accès gratuit à l'université et à la formation, la levée de tous les blocages au parcours universitaire, l'abolition de la propriété intellectuelle, la multiplication des bourses d'étude et des postes dans les résidences donnés avec des logiques méritocratiques, en opposition radicale à l'actuel Dpcm sur le droit à l'étude. Il est nécessaire d'encourager les financements publiques pour l'université et la recherche. Une loi financière qui enlève de l'argent à la culture pour le destiner à la guerre n'est pas acceptable.
NOUS VOULONS QUE TOUT LE MONDE PUISSE ETUDIER.

3. Nous sommes en train de construire une autre didactique. Meetings, discussions, congrès, séminaires autodirigés, fêtes, réappropriations d'espaces de sociabilité et de relation continûment niés par la réforme. Notre formation passe surtout à travers ces moments. La production de culture est, par sa propre nature, "anti-économique" et ne peut être mesurée en unités de temps et en crédits de formation. Le savoir n'est pas un produit ! Il s'agit d'un procès collectif et coopératif alternatif à la logique de l'université-entreprise, individualiste et compétitive. La parcellisation, la fragmentation et la déqualification de la culture ne porte qu'à la précarisation et au contrôle. Nous sommes pour l'autogestion de l'activité didactique et de la recherche. Nous sommes pour la démolition du système des crédits à travers plusieurs pratiques : l'inflation des crédits (c'est-à-dire la reconnaissance de toutes les activités formatives autodirigées) et l'irruption d'un savoir critique dans la programmation didactique.

4. NOUS VOULONS CONSTRUIRE NOTRE CULTURE. NOUS NE POUVONS ATTENDRE D'AUTRES REFORMES OU D'AUTRES GOUVERNEMENTS : NOTRE TEMPS EST ICI ET COMMENCE MAINTENANT!

[1] Depuis 1998, l'ensemble du système universitaire italien a été soumis à de profonds changements, qui visent à modifier non seulement la structure générale des études, mais aussi, parallèlement, la fonction sociale de l'université. Il s'agit d'une réforme qui a été pensée et menée à terme par les gouvernements de la gauche de la fin des années quatre-vingt-dix, et qui entre en vigueur massivement (bien que par des modalités qui peuvent varier d'une université à l'autre) à partir de l'année 2001-2002. Il serait trop long de décrire en détail les changements survenus mais on peut dire que les principales modifications sont de deux types : d'une part il y a une approche pédagogique assez différente par rapport à l'ancien régime, car l'esprit de la réforme est d'ancrer la formation universitaire dans le marché du travail, d'abandonner donc un modèle humaniste des études au profit d'un modéle plus "professionnel" ; d'autre part, et corrélativement, il y a une réorganisation qui touche à la structure même des études universitaires, désormais fondées sur un modèle construit par niveaux : un premier niveau, comportant trois ans d'études, et débouchant sur la laurea (la licence du système français) ; un deuxième niveau, comportant encore deux ans au terme desquels on obtient la laurea specialistica (qui pourrait correspondre au Master 2), et un dernier niveau, le doctorat. Le "3+2" est l'équivalent italien de la réforme du LMD.

Pour info :
unilotta@yahoo.it

Tandis que Nicolas Sarkozy et sa ministre de l'Université,Valérie Pécresse, se
font les propagandistes d’un enseignement supérieur voué à «une
économie de l'innovation » et au diktat de la « performance économique »,oubliant l'enseignement des humanités,inutiles à leurs yeux , et que la réforme sur l'autonomie des universités enterre l'universalité et l'égalitarisme de la mission d'enseignement,

La France en copiant le modèle anglo-américain mondialisé semble en retard d'une saison !

Harvard ,une des universités les plus prestigieuses des Etats-Unis ,a élu fin 2007, une présidente, Miss Drew Gilpin Faust, qui dessinait dans son discours inaugural, le contours d’une résistance à
la soumission d'une «compétitivité mondiale» en lui opposant les
valeurs humanistes de la connaissance et de l'enseignement et, prônant l'égalité des chances.

Comique,non?

New York Times ,13 octobre 2007

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/13/education/13harvard.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
http://www.nytimes.com

First Woman Takes Reins at Harvard
By SARA RIMER
traduit en français

« Drew Gilpin Faust, première femme présidente de l'université de
Harvard, a pris ses fonctions vendredi 12 octobre 2007 avec un discours
offensif de défense des valeurs de l'enseignement supérieur qui
seraient menacées par les exigences d'évaluation des enseignements et
l'obligation de former la main-d'oeuvre destinée à une économie
mondialisée. Selon la présidente, "l'essence même de l'université est
qu'elle est comptable vis-à-vis du passé et du futur, pas simplement et
pas même en premier lieu, vis-à-vis du présent".

« Pour Drew Gilpin Faust, historienne de formation et ancienne
directrice du Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, "l'université, ce
n'est pas seulement les résultats financiers du prochain trimestre. Ce
n'est même pas ce qu'un étudiant est devenu au moment de la remise de
son diplôme. Il s'agit d'un enseignement qui modèle à vie, un
enseignement qui transmet l'héritage des millénaires, un enseignement
qui façonne l'avenir." Elle s'est clairement et fortement opposée dans
son discours aux tentatives de l'État fédéral de rendre les universités
comptables de ce qu'elles enseignent en essayant de le quantifier. Elle
en a appelé aux universités afin qu'elles "prennent l'initiative en
définissant elles-mêmes ce dont elles sont comptables".
« Son discours inaugural a également apporté une défense ferme du rôle
traditionnel de l'université qui est "l'organisatrice d'une tradition
vivante", mais aussi un lieu "pour les philosophes autant que pour les
scientifiques", où l'enseignement et la connaissance sont valorisés en
partie "parce qu'ils définissent ce qui, à travers les siècles, a fait
de nous des humains et pas parce qu'ils peuvent améliorer notre
compétitivité mondiale".
« Elle a en outre signalé sa volonté de rendre l'enseignement à Harvard
"disponible et accessible", et de diversifier les effectifs de
l'université : "Ceux qui regrettent un âge d'or perdu de l'enseignement
supérieur devraient penser à la partie très limitée de la population à
qui cette utopie était destinée. L'université était réservée à une
petite élite; désormais, elle sert les masses, pas seulement quelques
privilégiés." Elle ajoute que les universités américaines ont servi "à
la fois d'emblème et de moteur pour l'expansion de la citoyenneté, de
l'égalité et des chances accordées aux noirs, aux femmes, aux juifs,
aux immigrants et à d'autres groupes qui auraient été mis dans des
quotas voire exclus à des époques antérieures".
« Même si elle a axé son discours sur les idées, Drew Gilpin Faust n'a
pas oublié de rappeler qu'il était indispensable qu'Harvard soit à la
pointe de la recherche scientifique mais que cela ne devait pas se
faire au détriment des valeurs humanistes de l'établissement: "Il est
urgent pour nous de poser les questions d'éthique et de sens de notre
action qui nous permettront de nous confronter à la signification
humaine, sociale et morale de notre relation changeante avec le monde
qui nous entoure."»

--------------------------------------------
l'article original en anglais

Drew Gilpin Faust, Harvard University’s
first female president, was inaugurated Friday and offered a spirited
defense of American higher education against demands that it quantify
what it is teaching and focus primarily on training a global work
force.
“The essence of a university is that it is uniquely accountable to the
past and to the future — not simply or even primarily to the present,”
said Dr. Faust, 60, a Civil War historian and the former head of the
Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at the university.
“A university is not about results in the next quarter,” Dr. Faust
said. “It is not even about who a student has become by graduation. It
is about learning that molds a lifetime, learning that transmits the
heritage of millennia; learning that shapes the future.”
In clear opposition to pressure from the federal government for
universities to prove they are accountable by quantifying how well they
teach, she called on higher education institutions themselves “to seize
the initiative in defining what we are accountable for.”
In an interview before the inauguration ceremony, Dr. Faust faulted a
federal Commission on the future of Higher Education empanelled by the
Bush administration for its focus on training a competitive work force
for the global economy. While higher education makes “a fundamental
contribution to training a work force,” she said, it should strive to
be far more than that.
She paraphrased W. E. B. DuBois: “Education is not to make men
carpenters so much as to make carpenters men.”
The commission, which was put in place by Margaret Spellings, the
education secretary, in its final report last year called for public
universities to measure learning with standardized tests, for federal
monitoring of college quality and for sweeping changes in financial
aid.
Dr. Faust’s speech offered a ringing defense of the traditional role of
universities as “stewards of living tradition,” as places for
“philosophers as well as scientists,” where learning and knowledge are
pursued in part “because they define what has over centuries made us
human, not because they can enhance our global competitiveness.”
Dr. Faust’s ascension to the presidency of the nation’s oldest
university came more than a year after Lawrence H. Summers, a former
treasury secretary, stepped down after a five-year tenure that drew
widespread faculty discontent. He set off a storm by suggesting that a
lack of intrinsic aptitude could help explain why fewer women than men
reach the top ranks of science and math in universities. Derek Bok, a
former Harvard president, served as an interim replacement.
Dr. Faust had Dr. Summers, Dr. Bok and another former Harvard
president, Neil Rudenstine, sitting nearby on stage on Friday, and at
one point she and Dr. Summers embraced. In the interview she said that
the University of California had erred by withdrawing a speaking
invitation to him after a faculty petition.
With her two-day inauguration festivities that included African
dancers; a reading by Toni Morrison; and speeches by the historian John
Hope Franklin and Deval Patrick, a Harvard graduate who is the first
black governor of Massachusetts, Dr. Faust also signaled that
universities like Harvard had to diversify their ranks.
“Those who long for a lost golden age of higher education should think
about the very limited population that alleged utopia actually served,”
she said. “College used to be a restricted to a tiny elite; now it
serves the many, not just the few.”

She noted that American colleges had served as “both the emblem and the
engine of the expansion of citizenship, equality and opportunity — to
blacks, women, Jews, immigrants, and others who would have been
subjected to quotas or excluded altogether in an earlier era.”
She added: “My presence here today — and indeed that of many others on
this platform — would have been unimaginable even a few short years
ago.”
She did not use the speech to lay out specific plans about what she
hopes to accomplish in the months ahead, but instead set out the values
and themes that she said she hoped would define her tenure. She did
however affirm Harvard’s commitment to making its education “available
and affordable.” Dr. Summers made it possible for students from
families with incomes of less than $60,000 a year to attend Harvard
without incurring debt.
She talked about the importance of Harvard being at the forefront of
scientific research, and of providing the resources for a new science
complex that will include stem cell research. At the same time, she
also emphasized the traditional humanistic values of the university.
“It is urgent,” she said, “that we pose the questions of ethics and
meaning that will enable us to confront the human, the social and the
moral significance of our changing relationship with the natural
world.”

-

I suffered a bout of illness beginning in late November. Then I submerged myself in new work on the questions we've pursued here: a paradigm for knowing in the disciplines that would give all the credit in the world to scientific methodology, but without disparaging or relativizing the other ways of knowing in relation to the natural sciences.

Eureka! I have found it. (I think.) It's still based on the Greeks, but it's more cogent and more deeply substantiated in the texts of Plato and Aristotle. Also, I've had incredible amounts of fun seeing what happens when I apply the "old" model for knowing to Galileo and Newton, to Descartes and Leibnitz, instead of their own rationalist model.

The old model for "how humans come to know," the theory of the "-ike" I started to talk about in the "Wily Socrates" posts, was based, of course, in the philosophical theorizing that energized the original vision of a liberal arts education: an education in the disciplines for the formation of citizens capable of self-government.

Plato and Aristotle, as we know, developed (so brilliantly and responsibly) this theory of knowing-through-the-disciplines -- that is, in my terms, the theory of the -ike -- from out of that gleam in the eye of the historical Socrates: from his practice of a "dialectics" devoted to the eidos, as it appeared in area of ethics (What is "Justice," "Friendship," the "Good Life"?).

So, I've been working out of Plato's Ion and Aristotle's Poetics, principally, with help from Plato's Theaetetus and the Republic and from other writings of Aristotle, to formalize their theory of the ike, but in terms that will be fresh and efficacious for us today. I've been using the Greek words in order to do this, attempting to (re)embue them with the formal rigor I believe they carried in the classical philosophical schools of Athens during the 4th century BCE.

The "-ike," of course, as my readers here will know, is a reference to this original theory of knowing, the Greco-European vision that inspired education for 2000 years in the West until the rise of science in the 17th century gave birth to a new "theory of knowledge." The term "ike" derives from the manner in which the Greeks formed disciplinary names by adding -ike to the name of the subject matter, as in poietike, musike, logike, grammatike, physike, arithmetike, and so forth. (This would eventually yeild our "poetics," "physics," "arithmetic," "mathematics," and so forth.)

The -ike suffix, in other words, indicated that a "techne" or an "episteme" was in view. (Poietike or arithmetike were short for techne poietike or techne rhetorike, but the "techne" part dropped out most of the time.) The Romans translated the Greek techne as the Latin ars, artis, and along with this, they translated the Greek episteme as scientia, thus giving us our modern "arts and sciences."

Yet today we tend to forget or overlook, given our deeply engrained scientific outlook in the Modern West, that while Aristotle formalized an existing distinction between the technes and epistemes as the "productive" ikes and the "theoretical" ikes, nontheless he still frequently employed either word in order to refer more generally to any formalized disciplinary practice, irrespective of its subject matter and methodology. (We would view arithmetic as a scientific discipline, for example, but while Aristotle saw it as "theoretical" and hence an episteme, it was still called techne arithmetike, just as poetics was called techne poietike. This wasn't incidental, either, but crucial to take into our account.)

By the way, Plato and Aristotles insisted upon using fluid vocabularies because they were concerned with teaching the nature of thought itself, and so, as teachers first, they inculcated the capacity to register and attend to the complicated formal levels of organization manifested by the various kinds of things. This emergence of flexibility and deftness on the part of their students was more important to them than the modern insistence on honing an exact set of technical terms.

Don't misunderstand me. Precision was as important to them as it was to Kepler, Galileo, or Newton. And the mechanics of motion couldn't have been developed apart from this method. But for the Greeks, the kind of precision varied according to the kind of discipline, and the precision they most desired was to be located ultimately in the development of persons capable of well-armed thinking, while 17th century thinkers valued as genuine the method that could be operated most mechanically and impersonally so as to acheive the kind of "universality" that they held to be the mark of genuine knowledge.

(This is why so many of Plato's dialogues warn us of the ambiguities that we must all, as "neophytes," confront and think through, if we hope to mature as thinkers, yet without showing us the path through the muddle itself. Aristotle is more generous to beginners. He is willing to set out the simplest basics in his Organon.)

Plato and Aristotle, I believe, were learning and teaching how to think dynamically, formally, and elegantly, but not mechanically. Their theory of knowing, in other words, involved the formal elegance of the ike itself, lying at a structural level deeper than the specialized methodologies of any of the individual ikes, whether they happened to be geometry, arithmetic, history, ethics, political theory, or, as in the Ion, cowherding, piloting a boat, or producing clean laundry.

It is striking that in Plato's very early account of -ike in the Ion, he depicts Socrates as teaching the theory of techne (or episteme) itself, rather than pursuing directly an ethical eidos (the so-called Form or Idea). Like the later Theaetetus, in which "Socrates" asks "What is episteme?" the Ion is devoted in depth to the theory of ike. In it, Socrates proceeds one by one through the formal distinguishing features belonging to any and all of the ikes. (This is in the course of querying whether the rhapsode Ion, who claims an ike for epic poetry, in fact does or does not possess an ike.) Thus we are shown the significance of Socrates' enquiries in ethics for the new philosophical way of life formalized by Plato. Both are based on an eidetic/dialectical theory of ike.
Both in Ion, and in Aristotle's brilliant response to the question of whether there is an ike for poetry (contained in the thoughtwork of the Poetics), we see a theory of what constitutes a genuine way of knowing that is quite capable of being held up today -- in the spirit of Neils Bohr's complementarity? -- as an alternative model for the arts and sciences and their role in the formation of a free citizenry.

In actuality, I do not think that the "new-old" paradigm of Greco-European knowing stands in the relationship of "complementarity" to the Enlightenment theory of knowledge -- that is, to the classical theory of scientific rationalism that was developed in the 17th century, that dominated the 18th and 19th centuries in the West, and that was elaborated exhaustively throughout much of the 20th century in the tradition of Frege, Russell, and Carnap (not to mention Wittgenstein and Husserl).

Instead, I think that each of these two historical models brings out certain features of a very complex and urgent question: how do human beings genuinely come to know? And what are the consequences of genuine learning to know, in terms of the ethical, political, and spiritual good of individuals and of their communities?

Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, along with 12 centuries of Christian thinkers in the medieval and Renaissance worlds, sought nothing less than human salvation through the life of the mind. (It is, after all, the mind's path to God for Augustine, Bonaventure, Aquinas, Dante, and the humanists of the Renaissance.) Yet none of them was the kind of intellectual snob that we moderns have been, with our elitist, patronizing, and exclusionary "theory of knowledge" and education. (They had their own snobberies and repressive elitisms, but not when it came to salvation.)

So this is the shape that my own work is now taking: following these two models that Western history offers us. The later model, established during the rise of science, was unquestionably built upon the laws of motion and gravitation, as its far-reaching Kuhnian paradigm. Galileo and Newton established this paradigm, however, by developing a new ike, one which was addressed to a newly redefined kind of thing. (It is utterly fascinating to look at the development of Newtonian mechanics through the lens of the Greek theory of ike, because it fits so remarkably well while placing its features in a fresh light.)

The first model for knowing, I believe, is best captured and represented by the account of ike elucidated by Aristotle in his Poetics. With respect to this "poetic" model, if we take it to serve as the Kuhnian paradigm for all of earlier Greco-European knowing, we must give the last word to Luce Irigary! (Over whom we have languished a good deal here, thanks to Alan Sokel.)

She deserves the nod because the essential differences between the two models turn out to resemble, at least metaphorically, the formal differences between the "mechanics of bodies in motion," on the one hand, and "fluid dynamics," on the other.
However, we should remember that "metaphorical" meant something quite different to Plato and Aristotle and later Greco-European thinkers than it has meant to moderns. Ability in the ikes, Aristotle remarked, shows itself in quickness with metaphor. (Contemporary physicists emphasize the creativity and invention of everyday working science. In many respects, they have modified the classical scientific paradigm already. We may all be on the threshold for a third model.)

Does the mark of real brilliance in the sciences differ fundamentally from what it is in the arts? Certainly, the heuristic methods and standards for testing differ from discipline to discipline. But something perhaps lies under them all. Something sub-stantial. the capacity to invent models deftly and fruitfully, by flexibly employing potential structural analogies and relationships, and intuiting likely symmetries. It lies in the human capacity to invent, apply, test, evaluate, modify, and abandon models, in the course of attempting to trace the elegantly formalizable dynamics of any given kind of thing.

------------

[I don't know how much of this current work I'll be placing here, but I'll be letting you know where to find it, for certain. I do intend to put more of the literary theory course here, since folks are reading it, and I'm very glad to engage in dialogue about any of this. Those exchanges last summer and fall with the physicists (and biologist) have proved invaluable to me; thank you all so much. My work will be more accurate and appealing across the disciplines because of all the repeated "checks" I've experienced here! And all of your "leads" and invaluable links.]

parceiros no crime

Une réflexion matinale à propos du développement durable que je vous livre pour son extraordinaire attention qu'elle mérite................ Et si on parlait éthique et esthétique , dans ce monde de barbares ?

Nathalie Blanc checheurE au CNRS , "Éthique et esthétique de l’environnement.", EspacesTemps.net, Textuel, 31.01.2008

L’idée de parler d’esthétique et d’éthique de l’environnement dans un article en réponse à un appel à contribution sur le développement durable peut paraître curieuse. Le développement durable doit permettre de dépasser les contradictions apparentes entre économie, environnement et social. En outre, le développement durable est devenu un nouveau cadre de la réflexion en ce qui concerne un développement social harmonieux et équilibré à l’échelle internationale. En dépit de ces assertions, on peut penser que le développement durable est plus préoccupé des ressorts techniques de son action que de ses engagements sociaux, ou qu’il n’est conscient des fondements anthropologiques des rapports à l’environnement. Dès lors, l’on peut s’interroger sur la place de l’éthique et de l’esthétique, d’une esthétique qui ne se contente pas du spectaculaire, instrument d’une médiatisation des enjeux environnementaux, mais qui va dans le sens d’une prise en compte des multiples liens sensibles à l’environnement. Le développement durable n’est pas « durable » s’il n’assure pas une place au souci qui guide toutes les relations de protection à l’environnement et qui en assurent la perpétuation. En effet, on peut s’interroger sur la validité d’un développement durable peu soucieux d’intégrer les vulnérables et les fragiles, et plus axé sur la modernisation écologique des filières de la production urbaine.

On rétorquera cependant que le développement durable intègre (concerne ?) les questions de justice environnementale. Sans aller plus loin demandons-nous jusqu’à quel point la manière dont on aborde la justice environnementale1 prend en compte les ressorts matériels et justificatifs d’une action (individuelle ou collective) associée à un sentiment de justice ou d’injustice concernant l’idée d’environnement.

http://espacestemps.net/document4102.html

"Magick has always been an empowering DIY art, it’s practitioners have utilized many tools in a variety of manner throughout time. The modern neophyte technomancer is disempowered from the get go simply based on where (s)he’ll stand relative to the large amounts of information needed to execute an operation through the technical aspects of this art. As a result he/she has only the option of utilizing pre-formed digi-tools for executing work – esp. looking towards computer-based solutions to magickal questions. Often times you can find an executable that claims to do what you need but did you write it off of principals you researched and thus believed to be true? Essentially circuit bending offers us a simple and elegant solution for building occultech out of equipment brought into your possession – often times through synchronicity – as a means of digital invocation and evocation." excerpt from Circuit Bending as A Spiritual Artform by Ikipr featured in Key64

> na still acima, juliano (tiaraju aronovich) após uma luta com ery silva, campeão sul-americano de muay thai.  

NOVIDADES semfiolescas:  a maioria das cenas de violência do SEM FIO já estão montadas... e estão de tirar o fôlego!! Quem viu, surpreendeu-se com o realismo e o impacto.  pau-a-pau com o que há de melhor em ação por aí no cinema internacional....não vamos revelar nos teasers para não estragar a surpresa, né?

e dá-lhe sem fio....

endless sprayed water blow and lots of blood, little one! Yeah, Bee, that´s for ya!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnI7AkrMbOQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhlHCID4Q_w

www.semfioofilme.com.br

você se sente como uma cobaia, presa numa gaiola corporativista, centro das atenções dum bando de espertalhões que se divertem com suas piadas internas, suas experiências teratogênicas, experiências que deformarão o seu corpo, a sua mente, que aniquilarão com o pouco que resta de sua identidade? é assim que você se sente? nós entenderemos se você disser, Não!, claro que entenderemos. a afirmação acima não quer dizer nada, ela não faz o menor sentido, não é verdade? mesmo porque não foi uma afirmação, mas uma pergunta.

é?

diga-nos você.