--SORRY FOR CROSS-POSTINGS--

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen

Please find attached a call for artistic research contributions  
during the Berlin SLSA conference 2008. An exhibition will be  
organised parallel to the academic talks (cf. "Stream 11").  
Applications are welcome.

Please feel free to distribute.

Sincerely

Florian Dombois

http://www.zfl.gwz-berlin.de/veranstaltungen/veranstaltungen//_/242/? 
cHash=dda0c2e0e0v#anker10)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figurations of Knowledge
European Conference of the Society for Literature, Science, and the Arts
(SLSA)
at the Center for Literary and Cultural Research Berlin (Zentrum für
Literatur- und Kulturforschung Berlin, ZfL)
June 03 - 07, 2008

CALL FOR PAPERS

a) Introduction
b) Panel and paper proposals

Deadline: October 15, 2007 - Acceptance notification: November 30, 2007

c) Submission Procedures

d) Content Organisation / Streams:
Stream 1. Inspiration and Intuition (Dir.: Sabine Flach, Ohad Parnes,
Martin Treml)
Stream 2. Acceleration, Synchronisation, Deceleration (Dir.: Erik  
Porath)
Stream 3. Fade to Grey. Other Sides of Cognition (Dir.: Sabine Flach,
Elisabeth Strowick)
Stream 4. Extraordinary Concepts of Perception (Dir.: Katrin Solhdju,
Margarete Vöhringer, Yvonne Wübben)
Stream 5. Languages of Science - Sciences of Language (Dir.: Robert
Stockhammer, Stefan Willer)
Stream 6. History of Concepts between Disciplines and Cultures (Dir.:
Ernst Müller, Falko Schmieder)
Stream 7. Bodies of Evidence (Dir.: Bergit Arends)
Stream 8. Vitality - Contours and Boundaries between Life and Death
(Dir.: Christine Blättler, Ulrike Vedder)
Stream 9. Politics of Knowledge (Dir.: Uwe Wirth)
Stream 10. Desire for/after Affect (Dir.: Marie-Luise Angerer)
Stream 11. Art as Research (Dir.: Florian Dombois)

e) Keynote Lectures

f) Contact

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
a) Introduction
Recent and current research in Science Studies has devoted increasing
attention to semantic transfers, translations, and changes of register
between forms of knowledge. In terms of studying the relationship
between literature, science, and the arts, this implies a general
reinterpretation of how scientific knowledge affects literature and the
arts or how it is represented in them. For the 'and' linking established
oppositional pairs such as 'art and science,' 'literature and science,'
or else 'sciences and humanities' ultimately presumes a homogeneous
situation on both respective sides. It is only under this precondition
that the clear dichotomies between knowledge cultures can be formed
which are so powerful within the system of modern science. Yet the arts
- as well as the historical and hermeneutic disciplines - have always
worked empirically, and the sciences have long dealt with questions
calling for the interpretative capacity of the humanities or the
creative potential of the arts: questions such as those about free will
or consciousness.
The 2008 European Conference of the Society for Literature, Science, and
the Arts (SLSA) will therefore focus on such transitional phenomena with
their historical, conceptual, and epistemological conditions. In
contrast to the persistent tendency of science theory, science history,
and science policies to fall back on the 'two cultures' model, we intend
to examine how knowledge figures both historically and presently within
the plurality and heterogeneity of knowledge cultures, i.e. in different
respective functional contexts. The perspective of figurations of
knowledge draws on the multiple meanings of the notions figure and
figuration - from the symbolism of mathematical, geometric, or
diagrammatic figures to figurality and figuration in rhetoric and
iconography up to figural interpretation as an interpretative tool -, in
order to delineate the specific ways in which knowledge is produced,
distributed, and received in the interplay of schematization and
dynamization, of empiricism and speculation, of measurement and
interpretation. Thus, figurations of knowledge are understood to be
instances of thought, speech, imagery, and experiment in which
crossovers between literature, science, and the arts are essential.


b) Panel and paper proposals
(Deadline: October 15, 2007 - Acceptance notification: November 30,  
2007)

SLSA conferences are organised in thematic focuses, so-called 'streams',
which again are subdivided in several panels. Each panel comprises 3 to
5 individual papers.
Conference Language will be English.
Panel and paper proposals should be submitted by email to the organiser
of the respective stream. The deadline for proposals is October 15,  
2007.
Panel proposals:  Panels include 3 to 5 papers. Panel proposals should
include names, institutional affiliations and contact information for
all participants. Please nominate one of the participants or an
additional person as chair. Proposals must include panel description
(150 words) plus abstracts for each paper (300 words each). Panel
proposals with only two speakers should be prepared to welcome one or
two additional panelists to their session.
Paper proposals should include a name, institutional affiliation and
contact information. Proposals must have a paper title and an abstract
(300 words). Individual papers will be fitted together into panels by
the stream organisers.
Criteria for acceptance include originality, coherence, and relevance to
the topics of the respective stream. Please bear in mind that panel
proposals have a greater assurance of acceptance than do individual  
papers.
All abstracts of the accepted papers and panels will be posted on the
conference website and printed in the program.


c) Submission Procedures
There will be a conference fee for all participants. You will find
further information here soon. Moreover, all participants must be
registered SLSA members.

Accommodation and travel expenses will have to be taken charge of by
participants themselves.

d) Content Organisation / Streams
The following streams are on hand:

1. Inspiration and Intuition (Dir.: Sabine Flach, Ohad Parnes, Martin  
Treml)
Intuition and inspiration are two distinct yet intimately related
concepts. They play a central role in various fields of knowledge,
notably in the religious experience and in the perception and
self-perception of the artistic creation. Usually, the concept of
inspiration is reserved to religious and artistic phenomena, while the
word 'intuition' is used for seemingly more rational processes like the
act of scientific discovery. Arguably, inspiration and intuition are
part of every knowledge-production processes, and the relation between
these two concepts is much closer than often assumed. From the religious
perspective inspiration is the key concept lying at the core of
divination rituals. Typically, a unique spiritual state has to be
attained through which a human being becomes the mediator of higher
knowledge. The prophet, too, is usually described as reluctantly
becoming the mouthpiece of God, being forced to take on this role. But
scientists also often describe their own discovery process in terms of
intuitive recognition.
We would like to dedicate the SLSA 2008 stream Intuition and inspiration
in religion, art and the sciences to an interdisciplinary discussion of
the role of intuition in contemporary knowledge. We are especially
interested in papers aimed at bringing together hitherto disparate
disciplines and research perspectives. As leading questions for
abstracts we propose:
- What role do inspiration and intuition play in the artistic/creative
process; how does the artist engage in these modes of thought?
- Is it the same kind of intuitive understanding which underlies
scientific and artistic production processes?
- Is a 'rational' explanation of intuition possible?
- How could the 'literature and sciences' perspective contribute to our
understanding of intuition and its various figurations?
- What are the exact connections between inspiration and intuition in
religion; how do they determine different forms of expression and
knowledge gained by these concepts?
- Could the recent boom of research into intuition in the social
sciences be explained as part of a more general cultural turn?

Please send proposals (150 words for panel proposals, 300 words for each
individual paper proposal) to: [log in to unmask]" (Sabine Flach),
[log in to unmask]" (Ohad Parnes), [log in to unmask]"
(Martin Treml).


2. Acceleration, Synchronisation, Deceleration (Dir.: Erik Porath)
Since Modernity has repeatedly been characterised as the age of
acceleration, one has to have in mind the ongoing discovery of slowness
as a complementary aspect of this diagnosis - as it is to be seen for
example in Goethe's discomfort with the "velocipheric" character of
culture, Nietzsche's plea for  "rumination" as a mode of cognition or
Virilio's "dromologic" criticism of media culture as a technology of
war. Acceleration und deceleration can be analysed as temporal
strategies, which generate and coordinate different spaces of time and
temporal processes. Far in access of the trivial assertion of the
inevitability of the category of time regarding the constitution of
nature and of culture, of the sciences and of the arts, this stream will
explore diverse temporal practices and forms of temporality as specific
figurations of knowledge.
We are inviting proposals for panels (3-5 papers) or single papers to
the following or related topics:
- lifetime and memorial practices (recording strategies, time
management, memory theories etc.)
- representability of time (neuroscientific monitoring concerning
spatio-temporal activity patterns of neuronal processing, literature and
narratology, music as temporal formation, living time and time of
creation in respect of artistic work)
- media and models of heterochrony (subjective time vs. time of the
apparatus, living vs. measured time; leaps of time, reversion of time,
ekstasis; (psycho-)pathology of temporal experience)
- cyclical vs. linear time (periodicity and biorhythms within
chronobiology; irreversibility of time, evolution and the arrow of time)
Please send proposals (150 words for panel proposals, 300 words for each
individual paper proposal) to [log in to unmask]" (Erik Porath).


3. Fade to Grey. Other Sides of Cognition (Dir.: Sabine Flach, Elisabeth
Strowick)
This stream places into new perspective the interplay of cognitive
processes and emotions, as currently discussed heatedly in brain
research, on the basis of a detailed investigation of visual art and
literature since the 1950s. When the 1990s were hailed as the 'Decade of
the Brain,' this elevated neuro- and cognitive sciences to the status of
the 'leading sciences' in explaining cognitive processes. This hegemonic
claim, which entails conceptual exclusions, will not simply be
questioned here; rather, the stream focuses on how the genuine and
productive achievements of the arts contribute to developing another
epistemological history of cognition. Adopting this specific - and fresh
- approach, this project fathoms the other sides of cognition inasmuch
as the exclusions and grey areas produced by brain research occur as
themes in art and literature - notably, these exclusions and grey areas
form the site of complex cultural and social processes.
Unlike the privileging of the metaphor of cartography or of the face in
the cognitive sciences as a surface upon which the interrelation of
cognitions and emotions can be visualized, the stream furthermore
explores the 'other knowledge' that the arts have of the interrelation
of cognition and emotion on the basis of the manifold articulations of
the body, that is, artistic and literary body scenarios. These afford
opportunities to conceptualise the interplay of cognition and emotion,
such as the transition zones existing to consciousness (the not-yet
conscious) or transformations of perception, which imaging procedures
systematically exclude inasmuch as they are harnessed to localising
cognition with isolated and well-defined entities - such as Positron
Emission Tomography (PET) and functional Magnet Resonance Tomography
(fMRT).

We are inviting proposals for panels (3-5 papers) and individual papers
from the following fields: history of science, art history, literary
criticism, media studies, cultural studies, neuro- and cognitive
sciences. The call welcomes proposals which address
- the complex interplay of vegetative, neuromuscular, cognitive, and
emotional processes mapped throughout the body,
- forms of representation of cognition (regarding temporality, motion,
visualization) in science, art, and literature,
- the relation between media techniques and modelling cognitive  
processes
- approaches considering cognitive processes in stronger conjunction
with the whole body in the neuro- and cognitive sciences.

Please send proposals (150 words for panel proposals, 300 words for each
individual paper proposal) to [log in to unmask]" (Sabine Flach),
[log in to unmask] (Elisabeth Strowick).


4. Extraordinary Concepts of Perception (Dir.: Katrin Solhdju, Margarete
Vöhringer, Yvonne Wübben)
What would it be like to be mad? Around 1920, a group of artists and
psychologists close to Wassily Kandinsky asked this question when
planning the foundation of an "Institute for Ingenuity". This institute
aimed at producing geniuses. In isolation the students should become mad
and thus at once encounter ingenuity. This experimental reactivation of
the old topos of the vicinity between madness and the genius at the same
time suggested that it was possible to produce novelty or creativity by
acquiring a so far unfamiliar perspective on reality, the perspective of
an artificial madness.
Some years earlier the biologist and philosopher Jakob von Uexküll had
asked: What would it be like to be a sea urchin or a fly, what would
perception of reality reveal from the point of view of an earthworm, a
plant or a molecule? What he aimed at was not the production of
ingenuity but a strategic pluralization of reality. He imagined how
reality would change if we took into consideration as many different
perspectives as possible. Reality appeared thus as a complex
entanglement, a multiperspectival universe of an infinite number of
experiences that could only be constructed and reveal themselves in a
never ending process of experimentation that took on the risk to leave
one's own human perspective behind.
Starting from this vision of reality as made of a multiplicity of
perspectives this stream would like to look at the history of
investigating and representing extraordinary perception in various
fields. Extraordinary perceptions include perceptions of non-human
actors like animals and plants as well as the exceptional modes and
abilities of perception as practiced by the psychically ill, the
artificially mad, and by artists. Extra-ordinary in this context thus
signifies something that is added, a surplus, an extra portion of
experience or perception that is added to reality. By investigating the
history of various pluralizing practices of perception the stream aims
at challenging some of our habitual perspectives on reality.

We are inviting proposals for panels (3-5 papers) and individual papers
from various disciplines such as history and philosophy of science,
history of art, ethnology and cultural studies. Possible topics could be
- perceptions of animals and plants,
- visions of mentally ill,
- perceptions of artists and geniuses.
Please send proposals (150 words for panel proposals, 300 words for each
individual paper proposal) to [log in to unmask]" (Katrin  
Solhdju).


5. Languages of Science - Sciences of Language (Dir.: Robert
Stockhammer, Stefan Willer)
Since Thomas Sprat included a chapter on "Their Manner of Discourse" in
his History of the Royal Society, at the latest, epistemic and
linguistic shifts go hand in hand. While the history of science has been
aware of this connection for several decades, its scope has mostly been
narrowed to one master trope, the inavoidable metaphor. Other linguistic
features, however, might be equally basic elements of the 'style' of
scientific formations: grammatical structure, narrative techniques etc.
In order to reach further insights, it might be helpful to include the
history of linguistics into the investigation - following Foucault who,
in his Order of Things, demonstrated the structural relationship of
knowledge concerning life, labour, and language in simultaneous
historical formations. An important part of this history consists in
variable claims of linguistics to count as a (natural, 'exact') science:
as for instance in attempts of comparative linguistics to share the
paradigm of evolution, in linguistic analogies to formal logic, or in
recent research programmes of neurolinguistics and cognitive
linguistics. Specific textual features of these approaches (as, e.g.,
genealogical trees of languages, or mathematical formulae in Chomskyan
theories) deserve to be analyzed in their own right.
We are inviting proposals for panels (3-5 papers) and individual papers
from linguists and historians of linguistics as well as from other
scholars interested in the 'linguality' of historical epistemology.
Possible topics include, but are not limited to
- the quest for linguistic universals, or for universal languages and
writing systems
- languages between nature and culture, linguistics between sciences and
humanities
- concepts of 'life and growth', 'evolution', 'extinction' of language 
(-s)
- implicit linguistic theories in scientific formations
Please send proposals (150 words for panel proposals, 300 words for each
individual paper proposal) to [log in to unmask]" (Robert
Stockhammer), [log in to unmask]" (Stefan Willer).


6. History of Concepts between Disciplines and Cultures (Dir.: Ernst
Müller, Falko Schmieder)
The stream focusses on the innovative potential of interdisciplinarity
in History of Concepts and Historical Semantics. Both paradigms seem to
provide an effective methodical inventary for a historical approach to
processes of semantic transfers, metaphorisations and register changes
between different fields of knowledge. Yet the great projects of History
of (aesthetical, political, philosophical) Concepts/Ideas did, in
general, neither aim at crossing discplinary boundaries nor did they,
operating with a rather (idealistically or positivistically) restricted
notion of 'concept', display much sensibility of the problem of
metaphorical-conceptual interferences. It is just this problem of the
specific methodical approach of an explicitly
interdisciplinary-intercultural History of Concepts that shall be
discussed in this stream.
Contributions should perform models for a methodical integration of
historical hermeneutics with the historical analysis of the effect of
material (experimental) and cultural techniques on the shaping of
concepts - the latter including medial representation as well as
mediating processes between philological-philosophical and natural
sciences. It is not just from their systematic status inside a specific
scientific paradigm that concepts can fully be understood. On the
contrary, recent research especially on the history of natural sciences
has exemplarily shown that explanatory evidence and innovative power of
scientific concepts owe no less from external connotations. Literature
and Arts may play an important intermediary role here. Consequently, we
would like to discuss fruitful connections to discourse theory,
linguistics, pragmatics, etymology and media theory.
We are inviting proposals for panels (3-5 papers) or single papers to
the following or related topics:
- methodical as well as practical investigations into phenomena of
interdisciplinary and/or interdiscoursive semantic transfers,
- the function of rhetorical figures (primarily, but not exclusively, of
metaphor),
- hermeneutical approaches in the study of scientific practices and
materialities.
Please send proposals (150 words for panel proposals, 300 words for each
individual paper proposal) to [log in to unmask]" (Ernst Müller),
[log in to unmask]" (Falko Schmieder).


7. Bodies of Evidence (Dir.: Bergit Arends)
Many museums hold collections of human body remains which are used for
anthropological, medical, and cultural studies. Human remains objects
are imbued with a plethora of meanings. The interpretations of the
individual object continually change, marking passages in time. The
purpose of the discussion is to acknowledge past collecting, storage,
and display practices, and to sketch ideas and concepts for the future
of the readings and uses of human remains. In the UK recent changes in
legislation have forced Museums to reconsider the use, and ownership, of
their collections.   Under new legislation, the Human Tissue Act 2004,
Museums can now consider the return of human remains to their countries
of origin, whereas in the past the British Museum Act 1963 has prevented
such considerations and actions. The legislative changes have generated
a new interest in human remains collections, in particular with a view
of repatriating many of these objects, thereby radically changing their
context, use, and interpretation, and addressing a new balance of power.
The circumstances under which many human remains objects have been
acquired reflect the historic colonial and social attitudes of the past.
However, we still struggle today to understand and respect different
attitudes and values, especially where scientific and cultural contexts
diverge.
The issues brought about by the repatriation claims are complex; at the
heart of the debate lie the political, economical, and social
relationships between peoples and social classes then and now. These
clashes are epitomized within the emotive object of dispute. Through the
perceptions of scientists, artists, and historians, we will discuss
- Human remains collections, their ownership, access, and visibility
- Past and current collecting and display practices of human remains
- Ethics in holding human remains collections
- Anthropological research today
- Reflections on past uses of anthropological collections and their
justification of eugenics, racism, and colonial attitudes
The discussion is an invitation to think creatively and speculatively
about the future of human remains collections while acknowledging the  
past.
Please send proposals (150 words for panel proposals, 300 words for each
individual paper proposal) to [log in to unmask]" (Bergit Arends).


8. Vitality - Contours and Boundaries between Life and Death (Dir.:
Christine Blättler, Ulrike Vedder)
How does vitality appear, how is it articulated? How to draw the
boundary between life and death, the boundary that is at the same time a
strict one and a locus for cultural negotiations, or even for
circulations? These questions do not aim at an abstract principle or
essence of life, they do not start from death as lack of vitality nor
from life as a maximal fitness. Rather they focus on different
emergences, interstages, and transitions, as concepts of vitality are
always situated between the poles of life and death. In 1800, the
physician Xavier Bichat proposed a definition of life as the ensemble of
those functions that resist death; a medical understanding of healthy
life was often developed through pathology. On the other side
evolutionary concepts in Life Sciences deal with 'survival' and
'selection', while in Biopolitics life itself is at stake. For defining
life, vitality, and death, bodies and their material changes have been
observed and examined, even under experimental conditions, in physiology
as in the arts, in life engineering as in literature.
This stream will take into consideration different and more or less
powerful manifestations of vitality, including their historical,
scientific, medial, and aesthetic dimensions.

We are inviting proposals for panels (3-5 papers) or single papers to
the following or related topics:
- economy and life/vitality (circulations, excess etc.)
- thresholds and borderlines (apparent death, coma)
- the afterlife of the dead
- virtual life, artificial life, life engineering
Please send proposals (150 words for panel proposals, 300 words for each
individual paper proposal) to [log in to unmask] (Christine
Blättler), [log in to unmask] (Ulrike Vedder).


9. Politics of Knowledge (Dir.: Uwe Wirth)
This stream focusses on the exploration of the manifold manifestations
of the political in the production of knowledge.
For that matter, "policital" signifies every process which establishes
an order of knowledge and is controlled by strategies for achieving an
objective. These strategies may include preferences for specific
questions and the supression of aspects which contradict prevalent modes
of thinking as well as significant changes of the interpretative frame
which forms and transforms an order of knowledge. Therein, politics of
knowledge manifest in all decisions controlling processes of producing
knowledge within frameworks of thought collectives, i.e. politics of
knowledge can be found in the dispositives under which knowledge is
generated.
This applies, firstly, to every claim on validity used for the
definition and institutionalisation of what can be scientifically (and
artistically) qualified; secondly, to the internal and external economic
conditions (such as money, time, energy) under which scientific and
artistic knowledge is produced and, thirdly, to the interference between
poetologies of knowledge and politics of knowledge.
This may be observed in processes of innovation, when the development
from invention to innovation is influenced by several strategic (i.e.
political) interventions. It might as well be the case in the creation
of esoteric and exoteric areas within the production of knowledge, where
a differentiation between experts, dilettantes and popular scientists
occurs.
We request synopses from the fields of History of Science, Science of
Art and Science of Literature. Topics may include analyses of individual
cases of the development of particular areas in research and art.
Please send proposals (150 words for panel proposals, 300 words for each
individual paper proposal) to [log in to unmask] (Uwe
Wirth).


10. Desire for/after Affect (Dir.: Marie-Luise Angerer)
"Desire" is a term that has often been used, especially since the 1970s,
in conjunction with that of "the subject". This desire is directed at
"the real" which is in turn defined as the generic core of the
linguistic order. As a result of the recent focus on affect, these three
terms - desire, the subject, the real - have been fundamentally shaken
up and altered, or lastingly called into question.
If one examines the combined efforts of neurology, psychology, art, the
human and natural sciences, economy and politics, then talk of an
affective paradigm certainly makes sense, as all of these fields have
declared an interest in affect, in emotions and sensations, in pathos,
passions, and the senses. However, this generalized affective euphoria
cannot be explained solely in terms of a long repression by language,
the logos, and reason. Instead, desire itself must be directed towards
affect and the question must be asked as to what desire aims for? This
may give rise to surprising imaginations, wishes and longings - the
human as a bridge between machine and animal, not animal enough and as
more than a machine. In this process of analysis, basic elements of the
human as language, thought, the mind, the unconscious, etc., are
reassessed - as political variables in historical/scientific discourse
or as constructions determined by or independent of knowledge. Is it
possible to conceive of a subject without desire? Can the concepts
presented long ago by Deleuze and Guattari be implemented today in the
sense of their political-economic-ethical necessity? To put the question
in provocative terms: in the age of a global organ market, has the
body-without-organs attained its cynical realization?

We are inviting proposals for panels (3-5 papers) and individual papers
from the fields of art, media/film/art theory, history of science,
literary theory and cultural studies that focus on affect and desire
for/after the affective organism and consider it from different, unusual
angles.
Please send proposals (150 words for panel proposals, 300 words for each
individual paper proposal) to [log in to unmask]" (Marie-Luise Angerer).


11. Art as Research (Dir.: Florian Dombois)
Over the past few years, there have been increasing calls for art to be
granted a claim to understanding and research. The arts, it is said, can
generate and formulate knowledge in their different disciplines - music,
theatre, literature and dance etc. - which is equivalent to the
production of scientific findings, or which accompanies and supplements
these. Most of those advocating this approach insist on the different
nature of this knowledge and on the fact that artistic research cannot
be transposed to the traditional forms of representation in science.
We share this view and, at this year's SLSA conference, therefore wish
to introduce a new format of stream. The results of artistic research
are no longer to be presented in talks and slide shows, i.e. secondary
formats but in the form of original contributions: an exhibition, a
concert or a theatre performance, as an alternative to a scientific
talk. The "Art as Research" stream is thus addressed explicitly to
artists, comprising an on-the-spot configuration of artistic works with
a research claim. There is no set theme.
For reasons of practicability, this first show of artistic research will
be confined to the field of objects. Compact works, which are fairly
easy to install, are to be brought together and discussed in an
exhibition. In the same way as for scientific conference contributions,
a maximum of 20 minutes will be available for presenting, implementing
and experiencing the work, which will then be followed by a discussion
of the work.
Please submit applications, accompanied by the standard documentation,
specifying especially your epistemic interest. Technical details on the
space required or the duration of the performance, etc. should similarly
be enclosed. The selection will be made by an international team (Bergit
Arends | Natural History Museum London UK; Florian Dombois | Hochschule
der Künste Bern CH; Sabine Flach | Zentrum für Literatur- und
Kulturforschung Berlin D) according to criteria of artistic quality and
impact. The selected artists will not have to pay the conference fee,
and the intention is that a lump-sum payment will be available for the
implementation of the work.
Please send proposals to [log in to unmask] (Florian Dombois)


e) Keynote Lectures
Carol Colatrella (Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Literature,
Communication, and Culture; Executive Director of the SLSA)
Nick Hopwood (University of Cambridge, Dept. of History and Philosophy
of Science)
Ludwig Jäger (University of Aachen, Dept. of Linguistics and
Communication Studies; Kulturwissenschaftliches Forschungskolleg "Medien
und kulturelle Kommunikation", Köln)
Hans-Jörg Rheinberger (Max Planck Institute for the History of Science,
Berlin)
Sigrid Weigel (Director of the Center for Literary and Cultural
Research, Berlin)


f) Contact
For general questions about organisation and formats, please contact
[log in to unmask]

For specific questions regarding your proposals, please contact the
respective stream organisers. For Email-addresses see above!
http://www.zfl.gwz-berlin.de/veranstaltungen/veranstaltungen//_/242/? 
cHash=dda0c2e0e0


====
Paul Brown - based in OZ Aug-Sep 07
mailto:[log in to unmask] == http://www.paul-brown.com
OZ Landline +61 (0)7 5443 3491 == USA fax +1 309 216 9900
OZ Mobile +61 (0)419 72 74 85 == Skype paul-g-brown
====
Visiting Professor - Sussex University
http://www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/ccnr/research/creativity.html
====