leipzig2016:rhizome_project
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
leipzig2016:rhizome_project [2016/09/12 17:09] – markus | leipzig2016:rhizome_project [2016/10/25 17:02] (current) – markus | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== Rhizome project ====== | ====== Rhizome project ====== | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{: | ||
The //rhizome// is a concept of thought, knowledge, presentation, | The //rhizome// is a concept of thought, knowledge, presentation, | ||
Line 9: | Line 11: | ||
* In my PhD I had the problem of authorship. Of course some parts are clear citations but most of the work was greatly inspired by some books, papers, StackExchange threads etc. while no clear authorship can be given. Nothing in it is completely original thought, because all mathematical concepts already existed and where just maybe connected in a new way. So knowledge was created by combining / connecting old pieces. One could say more radically, that there is in fact no original thought, no essence in knowledge, everything is a combination of symbols, thoughts, and sensations that are in themselves such combinations. Yet our culture is obsessed with authorship and copyright! | * In my PhD I had the problem of authorship. Of course some parts are clear citations but most of the work was greatly inspired by some books, papers, StackExchange threads etc. while no clear authorship can be given. Nothing in it is completely original thought, because all mathematical concepts already existed and where just maybe connected in a new way. So knowledge was created by combining / connecting old pieces. One could say more radically, that there is in fact no original thought, no essence in knowledge, everything is a combination of symbols, thoughts, and sensations that are in themselves such combinations. Yet our culture is obsessed with authorship and copyright! | ||
- | * The concept of the //tree// is onmipresent in the occident and it always has an inherent hierarchy and thus represents power structures. One prominent example is the evolutionary tree (genealogical tree) but it has been shown that also [[https:// | + | * The concept of the //tree// is onmipresent in the occident and it always has an inherent hierarchy and thus represents power structures. One prominent example is the evolutionary tree (genealogical tree) but it has been shown that also [[wp> |
* The most obvious example for a rhizomatic structure is of course the brain as a web of neurons, where the complexity of connections is responsible for the mental capability. And the structure of the brain will always connect in some ways to the structure of thought. | * The most obvious example for a rhizomatic structure is of course the brain as a web of neurons, where the complexity of connections is responsible for the mental capability. And the structure of the brain will always connect in some ways to the structure of thought. | ||
* In botany it is like the interconnected roots of grass (grassroot!) or clover (although those might not be rhizomes in a strict botanical sense), with no main root, different thickness, cyclic connections, | * In botany it is like the interconnected roots of grass (grassroot!) or clover (although those might not be rhizomes in a strict botanical sense), with no main root, different thickness, cyclic connections, | ||
Line 26: | Line 28: | ||
* a theory can be used without a " | * a theory can be used without a " | ||
* mapping (" | * mapping (" | ||
- | * nomadic thinking and working (cf. [[https:// | + | * nomadic thinking and working (cf. [[wp>Paul Erdös]]) |
* allow all kinds of connections and change of dominant structures or even the very base (different ontologies, paradigm shifts) | * allow all kinds of connections and change of dominant structures or even the very base (different ontologies, paradigm shifts) | ||
* follow escape routes, deterretorialize your thought, think unconventionally and outside of the box | * follow escape routes, deterretorialize your thought, think unconventionally and outside of the box | ||
Line 47: | Line 49: | ||
Suppose one would enter a seminar, a workshop or even just start at university and there would be only offers of different courses without any starting point like a very rhizomatic structure. What would be the challenge for the teacher and the class? | Suppose one would enter a seminar, a workshop or even just start at university and there would be only offers of different courses without any starting point like a very rhizomatic structure. What would be the challenge for the teacher and the class? | ||
* He or she needs to speak for more or less any level of pre-knowledge (what actually also is true on a " | * He or she needs to speak for more or less any level of pre-knowledge (what actually also is true on a " | ||
- | * the traditional tree structure allows for an easy way of integrating things into a big picture, because one at least has the impression that there is such a " | + | * the traditional tree structure allows for an easy way of integrating things into a big picture, because one at least has the impression that there is such a " |
- | * a big practical problem could be that people "want their trees" because there are used to them, which is a normal process in human behaviour in my opinion. So also in this terms I think softness is important. We need to explain with good and easy examples why we should go another way. Also from the point of view that the tree needs not to be the netural | + | * a big practical problem could be that people "want their trees" because there are used to them, which is a normal process in human behaviour in my opinion. So also in this terms I think softness is important. We need to explain with good and easy examples why we should go another way. Also from the point of view that the tree needs not to be the neutral |
leipzig2016/rhizome_project.1473692941.txt.gz · Last modified: 2016/09/12 17:09 by markus