Hi Gunnar,
I appreciate your message, and thank you for your time... on the 6 points,
I was just picking up bits and pieces from Filippo's message in this
discussion and the standard of using imperative and indicative mood (don't
do this, do that; this is x, that is y; do not feel that way, and so on)
instead of more modest and convivial subjunctive mood.
I think the general comment is that respect goes along with tolerance, not
only of different opinions (that should be a must, I think we are all grown
up enough to know we have different opinions), but also of different style
of thinking, values, languages, experiences, rationalities, skills, and so
on. I am not saying we should all get along and pat each other back, what
would be the point of discussing if we all agree? We are all here because
we are different, disagreement is the whole point (as everybody else I am
leaning much from that). I am just trying to say that I would feel more
comfortable (and apparently I am not the only one) if more messages would
start with '*I believe that is...*[1]' instead of *'that is..*.', or '*in
my experience if you do that then this might happen*'...
Why on earth research should be associated with antagonism? Please look at
the language it is used to described what is going on here: wars, brawls,
fights. Why is it so?
Antagonistic arguments and imperative/indicative claims read patronising if
not even arrogant exactly because (as you rightfully pointed out) we do not
know each other and we are not in a cafe. We do not know where those
writing critical comments are coming from. I am sure you are all lovely
guys, but what you write is the only thing that travels in this list and
we should be more carefully in HOW we express ourselves, not much in WHAT
we express.
Back to my mention of standard, factual claims assume there is a better way
of thinking, a better set of values, better procedures,
indisputable truths, and so on (all typical characters of modernist western
scientism). Knowing a bit of social study of science and philosophy of
science (this is where I came from, at least in this conversation btw), I
am convinced this is a way to silence and kill differences, and apparently
this is what is going on here ... On this authors like Haraway, Leight-Star
and Stengers (just to mention few great names in - well, yes - in feminist
technoscience), but also the later Latour really opened my eyes.
Thank you, really gotta go now...
[1] 'in my opinion...', 'personally...', 'in my experience...', 'in my
readings/understanding...', and so on.
best
Cristiano
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Gunnar Swanson <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Cristiano,
>
> I hope this doesn't feel like I'm chastising you. I'm not. I'm just
> disagreeing with part of what you wrote. I post a fair amount to this list.
> I don't know if that makes me part of the "handful of (male) members" that
> seems to be in control (but I confess to being male even without the
> parentheses.)
>
> First, I'd like to point out that it is very difficult to find the right
> balance in a conversation like this. If you are sitting in a room with
> people you know, it makes sense to say something very short because you'll
> have instant and, if you're in the right room with the right people,
> somewhat coherent reply* and the exchange will turn into an actual
> conversation. You can figure out whether people are understanding what you
> intend, whether they need help in catching up to the argument you're
> making, and whether you are boring the hell out of them. (Well, at least
> sometimes I can figure that out.)
>
> In an asynchronous, indeterminate conversation like a listserv, a brief
> comment is very likely to be misunderstood, often sinking whatever purpose
> you hand in posting because people will reply without having the courtesy
> to read your mind and ask your intent. It's almost a caricature of a
> face-to-face conversation. A long post is likely to alienate people or just
> prove to be too much work for the busy people you were hoping to connect
> with. A short one will be insufficient. If you're talking to 2700 people,
> whatever tone you set will be wrong for at least a thousand of them.
> Whatever cultural knowledge you assume is shared will prove to be alien to
> at least a thousand. We all try to deal with the problem in our own ways.
>
> Ken, for example, takes the responsible route of writing detailed, serious
> mini essays. I admire his dedication to us. I know him well enough after 25
> years of email exchanges to know that what he does is a show of respect for
> the subject at hand and for us. If it is sometimes like drinking from a
> firehose, that is sometimes the byproduct of serious discussion. I know he
> hopes the list will become a serious academic exchange, with short calls
> and notices sharing space with serious and well-researched position papers.
> (I think he's also smart enough to know that's highly unlikely to happen.)
>
> Others try to encapsulate their beliefs in short quips. This can be very
> enjoyable but (at least from my point of view) is generally not very
> effective.
>
> Others invoke names and subject matter from philosophers to cosmologists,
> as if assuming that we have all read whatever they mentioned. At least in
> my case, they are usually wrong but I remind myself that I do not have to
> read every thread on the list, let alone care about and participate in all
> of them.
>
> As to people "telling the whole community [1] what we can say, [2] what is
> natural to feel, [3] what is rational, [4] how we should interpret
> messages, and [5] what is welcome, [6] more or less implicitly assuming
> they know better," sort of, I doubt it, yes, of course, and yes--of course.
>
> [1] It is reasonable in any conversation to note when the exchange has
> drifted away from agreed-upon subject matter or accepted levels of
> civility. I find it best to attempt to gently steer things back on track
> before making declarations regarding transgressions but there are cases
> where gentle steering is too little too late. This is not to say that any
> individual will have the same judgement on the subject as all others. When
> there is disagreement, stating "I think you are mistaken" is a good course
> of action. That's what you've done here and thank you for that (but I think
> you may be mistaken.))
>
> [2] I don't remember an instance of someone claiming what is natural to
> feel. Can you give some examples?
>
> [3] Of course people in a conversation about research and related
> activities will argue about whether something is rational. Claiming that
> they should not, is very odd, indeed. Assuming that anyone who makes such a
> claim is right simply because he (male) made the claim would be equally
> odd. Especially in a group like this one where it is quite unlikely that
> there will be agreement.
>
> [4] This likely sounds like I'm being snotty but I'm not: I don't know how
> to interpret your claim that people are telling everyone how they should
> interpret messages.
>
> [5] See [1] above.
>
> [6] Name a subject and there's someone on this list who knows more abut it
> than others do. If "knows better" was meant to mean something about social
> dominance, see [1] and [5.]
>
> I hope I'm not burying the lede here but any conversation will always be
> shaped by the people conversing. There may be some bit of a Gresham's Law
> ("bad money drives out good") thing going on but if the conversation is not
> that way you want it to be, the fact that you have not generally
> participated in the conversation is a salient fact.
>
> If you (or anyone) are not participating from fear of overly aggressive
> actions by other players, I will (in honor of the build up to the Stanley
> Cup), volunteer to be your (or anyone's) hockey goon. If you think someone
> is high sticking you, email me off list and I will take over the fight for
> you. The penalty box gives me time to think and I have (at least by US
> standards) pretty good medical insurance. (Some Warren Zevon for your
> entertainment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MSfhdJxZ_U ) So don't
> worry about getting hurt; just try to figure out what Gretzky meant by
> skating to where the puck is going to be.
>
>
> *Teena--Please call me out on the implications of "right" and "coherent."
> Other than this thread, we haven't heard from you in way too long. I miss
> you.
>
>
> Gunnar
>
> Gunnar Swanson
> East Carolina University
> graphic design program
>
> http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graphic/index.cfm
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Gunnar Swanson Design Office
> 1901 East 6th Street
> Greenville NC 27858
> USA
>
> http://www.gunnarswanson.com
> [log in to unmask]
> +1 252 258-7006
>
> > On May 30, 2015, at 5:10 AM, Cristiano Storni <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Prof. Durling,
> >
> > I just want to thank you very much for your message. I agree with Daria
> and
> > Teena: for each member withdrawing from the list with a public message,
> > there are probably dozens who go away silently, and even more who stay
> away
> > from posting for the fear of being 'chastise' in public (posting this
> > message is for me an exception).
> >
> > I am sorry, but I personally believe Filippo's message misses the point
> > here because it reaffirms (at least to me) how a handful of (male)
> members
> > sets up the standard by telling the whole community what we can say, what
> > is natural to feel, what is rational, how we should interpret messages,
> and
> > what is welcome, more or less implicitly assuming they know better. My
> > feeling is that some speak as they own this list. When generosity is
> > invoked I wonder if writing very long messages and sharing huge amount of
> > resources (which definitely show dedication) is not a way to actually
> kill
> > the conversation, mark the territory, and reaffirm one own superiority.
> But
> > let's not forget, if respect is the point, then I should respect that
> too...
> >
> > However, I must say that I thank God I have joined this list after
> getting
> > my PhD because joining any earlier would have been a bit discouraging
> (but
> > maybe it is just me).
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Cristiano
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
--
Cristiano Storni, PhD
Lecturer, Researcher, Course Director of the MSc/Ma in Interactive Media
Computer Science Building CS2-032
Interaction Design Centre
Dept. of Computer Science & Information Systems
University of Limerick - Limerick
Office: +353 61 202632
Fax: +353 61 213484
IDC personal Page <http://www.idc.ul.ie/people/cristiano-storni>
New: Imedia new website Imedia.csis.ul.ie
New: MSc/MA in Interactive media (Brochure)
<http://www.csis.ul.ie/imedia/Interactive%20Media%2024%20Jan%2014.pdf>
New students' projects available: Digital Art Week Now (Exhibition)
<http://www.dawn.ul.ie> 2014
Recent selected papers:
*New:* Diabetes self-care in-the-wild: design challenges for personal
health record systems and self-monitoring technologies
<http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/ITP-02-2013-0032> @
Information Technology and People
*New:* The problem of De-sign as conjuring: empowerment-in-use and the
politics of seams <http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2661436> @ PDC2014
*New:* A Manifesto for Epistemological Empowerment in Chronic Disease Self
Care <http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-13018-7_15> Springer
book chapter, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
