Cosmopedia

Κόσμος + παιδεία —> the comprehensive organization of knowledge.

The ultimate, all-encompassing, information archive.

Pierre Levy’s “cosmpopedia” vision of the Web as knowledge space suggests a deterritorialization of knowledge with misleadingly democratizing undertones (at least to participatory culture enthusiasts such as Henry Jenkins).  The advocating of the democratization of access to online information does not necessarily imply a simultaneous advocation of the democratization of knowledge production. When it comes to the provision and creation of knowledge in cyberspace, information is still -for the most part- organized under an implicit hierarchy that assigns legitimacy and authority accordingly (or, alternatively, it exists in a random and chaotic state and is thus not easily searchable and retrvievable to outsiders).  This is one way of filtering out “unnecessary” information/ web junk, but it inevitably means that an oligarchy (compared to the number of people who use the Internet) gets to determine what is unnecessary and what is considered of substance. Yes, the creative bounds are much more relaxed in cyberspace and more people can share their contributions, but there are still systems that help us determine what is “real” and what is “fake”, what is from a legitimate source and what is unreliable (e.g. website ratings, website reputation etc).

Conversely, we could also cautiously say that new media have changed (or, rather, expanded) not only the ways in which we access and process information, but also the ways in which information is organized and accumulated. Arguably, we are becoming less responsible for the information we share online. Case in point: this very blog. I do not fully cite my sources. Sometimes I paraphrase too loosely. I mix and match with no coherent transitions. My writing is haphazard.  But does that change the legitimacy of the information I have to share? Does it inevitably make it less reliable?Perhaps, but at least I am putting my thoughts out there. Will the future break down the still-existent barriers between the professional and the amateur, the academic and the non-scholarly? While this scenario seems to pave the way towards a more democratic access to information, it will probably not ameliorate the *quality* of information-production. It will, instead, make the quality of information more diverse, without necessarily improving or expanding it.

But for the sake of argument, let us consider the potential of the Web as archive and a site of  knowledge-production alongside Levy’s assertion that:  “no one knows everything, everyone knows something, all knowledge resides in humanity.” Will electracy lead the way towards a true cosmopedia, same as the one originally envisioned by the Ancient Greeks? According to Levy, cosmopedia “serves as a site of collective discussion, negotiation, and development… Unanswered questions will create tension within cosmopedic space, indicating regions where invention and innovation are required.” In light of this, electracy combined with heuretics can contribute to the expansion of an archive of knowledge, where information is accumulated through idea negotiation, exchange and collaboration.

Nevertheless, the question remains: who will organize this information in a way that is easily accessible and easy to navigate?  We may not need “gatekeepers” in the future, but we will still need referees, right? Of course, then the question that persists is whether this task will be open to “experts” and non-experts alike, and/or whether it will rest on a combination of the two groups.  The premise of electracy is that it’s “easy” or intuitive in some ways, and thus everyone can potentially gain mastery over the same skillset. However, heuretics is what will separate the “just” electrate from those who use electracy to invent. Just because someone can write does not mean they can produce something brilliant; the same goes for electracy.

Will heuretics within the electracy apparatus produce something useful/practical (in any way you choose to define that), or just something new?

Do I have anything to say – or does the network already take care of it? Mongrel  – NetMonster

Everything is Intertwingled?

Intertwingularity is not generally acknowledged, people keep pretending they can make things deeply hierarchical, categorizable and sequential when they can’t. Everything is deeply intertwingled – Ted Nelson

According to Educational Technology magazine, “Digital convergence brings four (previously) distinct industry sectors in collaboration/competition with each other. Thus, we have Media/Entertainment, PC/Computing, consumer electronics, and telecommunications industries all interacting more closely with each other than ever before. This version of digital convergence is happening all around us.”

Even though I do not think that the four industry sections were necessarily “distinct” prior to digital convergence to begin with, it is undeniable that with the advent of the Internet the convergence possibilities have multiplied.  Nevertheless, the digital and the academic have not (yet?) converged. As hierarchical structures are still in place – albeit temporarily displaced at times – some educational institutions (or, at least, some educators) are embracing the digital and manage to successfully incorporate it into pedagogical techniques.

Convergence misleadingly implies a smooth fusion of two supposedly discrete entities that have forged a symbiotic relationship. But, of course, convergence is the term we use for lack of a more adequate word.

While it is tempting to generalize the impact of digital learning on the quality of education on a global scale, the truth is that some countries cannot keep up. I want to talk about what I know, so I will focus on Europe – and specifically Greece- for the time being. Is Greece’s educational system on a par with the rest of Europe? Well, of course that depends on which European countries we are focusing on. Despite the European Union’s attempts to homogenize Europeanize standardize its participating members (e.g. in terms of exchange currency, educational language, and anglicized place naming), the educational system is still not uniform in terms of standards and quality. But should it be? Wouldn’t that mean that quality will subsequently be standardized and undiversified?

The Aftermath of the Riots?  – - – Digital Learning in Greece – - –

The introduction of digital learning in Greece might not be directly related to the rioters demands and the public’s disillusion with the Greek educational system. I am not trying to see the positive in the disaster here. It seems to me that the promotion of digital learning is more related to the allegedly impending recession that was looming even before the riots began.

In an attempt to enhance digital literacy, the Hellenic Republic is strengthening ICT infrastructure and supporting the development of digital content and educational software. The Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs wishes to modernize the administration of education via the incorporation of ICT into pedagogical strategies in all levels of education. The Ministry is also planning to introduce informatics as a subject in high schools and technical schools. In addition, three new projects have been proposed by the Ministry of Economy and Finance and the Ministry of National Education and Religious Affairs. The tentative names of these projects/ campaigns are: Get Digital, Portable Computer for Every Student, and Blog Out.

This seems promising, but there have been other projects prior to these ones that have never officially been launched.

Perhaps I can get myself a job in Greece if I ever finish my degree. Perhaps by then they will introduce Film and Media Studies in higher education. And perhaps students might actually be interested in enrolling. One can only hope. . .

Most of my family thinks I am making movies in grad school. They do not understand what the point is in studying film without actually producing it…

παιδεία, εκπαίδευση, μόρφωση

Software Takes Command

Lev Manovich’s most recent new media theory attempts to – once again – historicize the non-historicized. This time, he tackles the “field” (or what perhaps aspires to become at least a subfield) of software studies.  Up to this point, software studies – in the shape of  “cultural software” – does not exist simply because it has never been extensively contextualized and historicized. Manovich equates the understanding of software with the understanding of culture at large, since – according to him – software permeates all aspects of society. Manovich asserts that software has become the “new engine of culture”  – a phrase that, to me, evokes images of automation and mechanization. This is probably not what Manovich’s primary intention was in theorizing the significance of software studies, since automation and mechanization (among other functions, such as recombination and modularity) are more directly related to code studies.

The emergence of new fields of study (or, again, wannabe-disciplines – and not necessarily within the academia) suggests that we are confronted with new sensibilities that seem to demand theorization, historicization, and – above all – legitimization.

Software and Pedagogy/ Electracy

German media and literary theorist Friedrich Kittler has argued that students ought to know at least two software languages because, according to him, only “then they’ll be able to say something about what ‘culture’ is at the moment”.

But, does “saying” something through software languages guarantee that it will be heard? Is this a case of confusion -or, conflation- of the terms “software studies” and “code studies” ? I believe so, to some degree.

Does “saying” something in a software language inevitably involve an act of prosumption, where consumption and production both occur  (though not simultaneously or to an equal extent) ?

// Anti // Pro //

English trailer for Die Welle (The Wave, Dennis Gansel, 2008)

The latest re-imagining of this particular disaster experiment. Previous to this there was a TV version and a book.

An example of recycling, appropriating and re-imagining a disaster. An example of turning a disaster experiment into a myth by tapping into the mythologies of the  “real” disaster that never(?) came.  An example of situating the myth within the global experience economy through the film’s promotion and distribution. Film as commodity; film as a mediated experience of another mediated experience.

[The experiment: The Third Wave]

(A California high school, 1967: An experiment conducted by history teacher Ron Jones with his students. The experiment involved recreating the conditions in Nazi Germany and was meant to function as a demonstrative learning experience. ) Pedagogy gone awry. Isn’t this the biggest outcome pedagogy can hope for?

Youtube video: Greek youth against neonazism (posted May 2008)