Difference between revisions of "Holotopia: Socialized reality"
m |
m |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
<div class="col-md-3"></div> | <div class="col-md-3"></div> | ||
<div class="col-md-7"> | <div class="col-md-7"> | ||
| + | <p>Naturally, Werner Kollath, Erich Jantsch, Douglas Engelbart—and also Werner Heisenberg and so many other 20th century's visionary thinkers who saw elements of an emerging <em>paradigm</em>—made their appeals to <em>academia</em>. With astonishing consistency, they were ignored.</p> | ||
| + | <p>It is the <em>academia</em>'s privileged social role to decide what kinds of knowledge will be researched on and taught at universities, and given citizenship rights in our society. The standards for right knowledge, which the <em>academia</em> upholds in our society, decide what our education, public informing, and general information consumption will be like.</p> | ||
| + | <p>What <em>are</em> those standards? What are they based on?</p> | ||
| + | <p>Nobody knows!</p> | ||
| + | <blockquote> | ||
| + | <p>The <em>foundations</em> on which truth and meaning are created in our society, and which determine our cultural <em>praxis</em>, are composed of vague notions (such as that the scientific method provides an objectively true picture of reality) and historical prejudices, which have been recorded and interpreted by different people in different ways <em>a posteriori</em>. </p> | ||
| + | <p>During the 20th century a wealth of insights have been reached in the sciences, the humanities and in philosophy, which challenged or disproved our culture's <em>foundations</em>. </p> | ||
| + | <p><em>They too</em>, however, remained ignored.</p> | ||
| + | </blockquote> | ||
| + | <p>We use the <em>holoscope</em>, and the light of information, to illuminate the foundations on which the relationship we have with information is based, and on which our cultural reproduction has been developed. </p> | ||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
| + | <p>We show that when <em>federated</em>, the 20th century insights constitute a <em>foudnation</em> for a completely different handling of knowledge; and a completely new worldview.</p> | ||
| + | <p>Just as the case was in Galilei's time.</p> | ||
| + | </blockquote> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <!-- | ||
<p>The Enlightenment replaced one foundation stone (faith in the tradition, represented by the Scriptures), by another (trust in reason, empowered by knowledge)—and "a great cultural revival" was the result. Are the conditions ripe for a similar change today?</p> | <p>The Enlightenment replaced one foundation stone (faith in the tradition, represented by the Scriptures), by another (trust in reason, empowered by knowledge)—and "a great cultural revival" was the result. Are the conditions ripe for a similar change today?</p> | ||
<p>We will here be talking about "the core of our proposal"—about changing our very relationship with information.</p> | <p>We will here be talking about "the core of our proposal"—about changing our very relationship with information.</p> | ||
Revision as of 06:25, 10 May 2020
H O L O T O P I A: F I V E I N S I G H T S
Socialized reality
Naturally, Werner Kollath, Erich Jantsch, Douglas Engelbart—and also Werner Heisenberg and so many other 20th century's visionary thinkers who saw elements of an emerging paradigm—made their appeals to academia. With astonishing consistency, they were ignored.
It is the academia's privileged social role to decide what kinds of knowledge will be researched on and taught at universities, and given citizenship rights in our society. The standards for right knowledge, which the academia upholds in our society, decide what our education, public informing, and general information consumption will be like.
What are those standards? What are they based on?
Nobody knows!
The foundations on which truth and meaning are created in our society, and which determine our cultural praxis, are composed of vague notions (such as that the scientific method provides an objectively true picture of reality) and historical prejudices, which have been recorded and interpreted by different people in different ways a posteriori.
During the 20th century a wealth of insights have been reached in the sciences, the humanities and in philosophy, which challenged or disproved our culture's foundations.
They too, however, remained ignored.
We use the holoscope, and the light of information, to illuminate the foundations on which the relationship we have with information is based, and on which our cultural reproduction has been developed.
We show that when federated, the 20th century insights constitute a foudnation for a completely different handling of knowledge; and a completely new worldview.
Just as the case was in Galilei's time.