We have only to speak of an object to think that we are being objective. But, because we chose it in the first place, the object reveals more about us than we do about it. What we consider to be our fundamental ideas concerning the world are often indications of the immaturity of our minds. Sometimes we stand in wonder before a chosen object; we build up hypotheses and reveries; in this way we form convictions which have all the appearance of true knowledge. But the initial source is impure: the first impression is not fundamental truth. In point of fact, scientific objectivity is possible only if one has broken first with the immediate object, if one has refused to yield to seduction of the initial choice, if one has checked and contradicted the thoughts which arise from one’s first observation.
✖ Via Psychanlyse of Fire by Gaston Bachelard, tr. A. C. Ross, Beacon Press, [1938]1987, p. 1

Here’s the original French text:

Il suffit que nous parlions d’un objet pour nous croire objectifs. Mais par notre premier choix, l’objet nous désigne plus que nous le désignons et ce que nous croyons nos pensées fondamentales sur le monde sont souvent des confidences sur la jeunesse de notre esprit. Parfois nous nous émerveillons devant un objet élu; nous accumulons les hypothèses et les rêveries; nous formons ainsi des convictions qui ont l’apparence du savoir. Mais la source initiale est l’impure: l’évidence première n’est pas une vérité fondamentale. En fait, l’objectivité scientifique n’est possible que si l’on a d’abord rompu avec l’objet immédiat, si l’on a refusé la séduction du premier choix, si l’on a arrêté et contredit les pensées qui naissent de la première observation. (éd. Gallimard, coll. Idées, Paris, [1938]1949, p. 9)

Gaston Bachelard was a French epistemologist. Learn more on Wikipedia.



• Jul 26, 2010 link notes tagged: communication  epistemology  objectivity  knowledge  separation  relation  perception  idea  world  reality  Bachelard  understand  stand  object  subject  impression  truth  science  philosophy  poetry  psychoanalysis  fire  Prometheus  mediation  media  immediate  observation  contradiction 

Although Karim is named on YouTube’s site as a co-founder, Chad and Steve have promoted a highly simplified history of the company’s founding that largely excludes him. In the stripped-down version—repeated in dozens of news accounts—Chad and Steve got the idea in the winter of 2005, after they had trouble sharing videos online that had been shot at a dinner party at Steve’s San Francisco apartment. Karim says the dinner party never happened and that the seed idea of video sharing was his—although he is quick to say its realization in YouTube required “the equal efforts of all three of us.” Chad and Steve both say that the party did occur but that Karim wasn’t there. “Chad and I are pretty modest, and Jawed has tried to seize every opportunity to take credit,” Steve told me. But he also acknowledged that the notion that YouTube was founded after a dinner “was probably very strengthened by marketing ideas around creating a story that was very digestible.
✖ Via TIME: “The Gurus of YouTube” by John Cloud, Dec. 16, 2006

We have no problem understanding how our actions shape representations, narratives, ideas. It’s some time more difficult to understand how those constructs shape us in return. Here’s a good example of a narrative elaborated in order to shape the behavior of future adopters (toward the innovation that is YouTube). As a marketing tool, the story about the party is supposed to give users a basic idea about how to behave with YouTube.



• Jun 12, 2010 link notes tagged: technology  communication  art  representation  fiction  idea  action  community  organization  innovation  users  marketing  YouTube  story 
art communication technology data visualization map science paradigm idea ecology graphic design
✖ Via seedmediagroup photostream on Flickr: Relationships Among Scientific Paradigms (Hi-Res : 8.7MB)

“This map was constructed by sorting roughly 800,000 published papers into 776 different scientific paradigms (shown as pale circular nodes) based on how often the papers were cited together by authors of other papers. Links (curved black lines) were made between the paradigms that shared papers, then treated as rubber bands, holding similar paradigms nearer one another when a physical simulation forced every paradigm to repel every other; thus the layout derives directly from the data. Larger paradigms have more papers; node proximity and darker links indicate how many papers are shared between two paradigms. Flowing labels list common words unique to each paradigm, large labels general areas of scientific inquiry.” Credit: Research & Node Layout: Kevin Boyack and Dick Klavans (mapofscience.com); Data: Thompson ISI; Graphics & Typography: W. Bradford Paley (didi.com/brad); Commissioned Katy Börner (scimaps.org). Read ( a little) more over at Seed Magazine.



• Sep 03, 2009 link notes  [via] tagged: art  communication  technology  data  visualization  map  science  paradigm  idea  ecology  graphic  design 
art photography photographer idea concept medication drug brain anatomy body mind
✖ Via Horacio Salinas: “Brain Repair” for The New York Time Magazine.

“Horacio Salinas is a conceptual, still life photographer in New York, New York.”



• Aug 31, 2009 link notes tagged: art  photography  photographer  idea  concept  medication  drug  brain  anatomy  body  mind 

skandalon


1 2



ARCHIVE / TUMBLTAPE / RSS / CONTACT / Theme based on D&D