(Bio)technology, Identity, and the Other

Author(s):  
Anna Gotlib

This chapter offers a critical analysis of the place that evolving technologies (and especially bio-technologies) are beginning to occupy in our ideas about who we are and who we might become. This chapter’s general claim is that we cannot consider the nature, function, and role of technology without taking account of its impact on personal and group identities, and especially the identities of vulnerable others. The chapter addresses the difficult questions about how the impacts of emerging technologies, while in many ways positive, can also be sources of further othering of already vulnerable populations, and how the promise of human progress through enhancement (including everything from novel biomedical treatments and all the way to artificial intelligence and transhumanism) can also lead to a deepening liminality of the oppressed. The direction in which we ought to be heading as a technological species, the author suggests, should be motivated as much by considerations of identity-constituting effects of technological innovations as by the adventurism of techno-evolution itself.

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sherif A. Eissa

There are two principal reasons behind the lack of success in reaching a final peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians, namely, the malfunctioning negotiations’ framework from one side and the complexity of the negotiated issues from the other. This article is mainly addressing the bilateral framework’s flaws when it comes to the Oslo accords and the way the two negotiating parties have perceived them. It is an attempt to overhaul the existing Oslo peace process and not to create a new one. Oslo process has become entrenched over more than twenty years of different practices and legal realities. The article is also introducing a negotiating framework that combines the benefits of a multilateral regional track to the Oslo process aiming to redress the latent structural flaws. It is intended not to tackle the final status issues, as there is a plethora of literature doing so. The extensive focus on those complicated issues without redressing the process’ structural flaws has led partially to the current stalemate. The role of any mediator or external partner is not to solve those issues on behalf of the principal parties, but to work on the negotiating framework and the process itself.


2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lotte Philipsen

This article analyses how works of art that make use of or refer to digital technology can be approached, analysed, and understood aesthetically from two different perspectives. One perspective, which I shall term a ‘digital’ perspective, mainly focuses on poetics (or production) and technology when approach- ing the works, whereas the other, which I shall term a ‘post-digital’ perspective, focuses on aesthetic experience (or reception) when approaching the works. What I tentatively and for the purpose of practical analysis term the ‘digital’ and the ‘post-digital’ perspectives do not designate two different sets of concrete works of art or artistic practice and neither do they describe different periods.[1] Instead, the two perspectives co-exit as different discursive positions that are concretely ex- pressed in the way we talk about aesthetics in relation to art that makes use of and/or refers to digital technology. In short: When I choose here to talk about a digital and a post-digital perspective, I talk about two fundamentally different ways of ascribing aes- thetic meaning to (the same) concrete works of art. By drawing on the ideas of especially Immanuel Kant and Dominic McIver Lopes, it is the overall purposes of this article to ana- lyse and compare how the two perspectives understand the concept of aesthetics and to discuss some of the implications following from these understandings. As it turns out, one of the most significant implications is the role of the audience. 


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabi Reinmann

Bardone and Bauters suggest a re-conceptualization of design-based research using the classical term "phronesis" and question some methodological developments referring to the role of intervention and theory in design-based research. This discussion article is a comment on the text of Bardone and Bauters and pursues two aims: On the one hand the term “phronesis” is connected to the traditional concept of “pädagogischer Takt” (literally: “pedagogical tact”) to stimulate a joint discourse of both traditions. On the other hand, two main suggestions of Bardone und Bauters are critically examined, namely their proposal to conceptualize intervention in design-based research exclusively as an action, and their call for deriving generalizations via experiences instead of theories. The discussion article finally argues for maintaining the integrative power of design-based research by avoiding one-sided interpretations.  


2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-81
Author(s):  
Mohd A’Tarahim Mohd Razali Bin Mohd Razali ◽  
Mohd Yakub @ Zulkifli Mohd Yusoff Bin Mohd Yusoff ◽  
Nor Hafizi Yusof Bin Yusof ◽  
Siti Fatimah Salleh Binti Salleh ◽  
Mohd Faiz Hakimi Mat Deris Bin Mat Deris ◽  
...  

The aim of this study is to explore the importance of Qira’at Mutawatirah as a discipline particularly in the field of fiqh (jurisprudence). As a field of study, Qiraat (Quranic reading) plays a significant role in Islamic Fiqh by way of shaping the opinions and views of the fuqaha’ (jurists). Nevertheless, some fuqaha’ are less familiar with Qiraat as a study which has thus led to some confusion and ambiguity on the matter. It was even suggested that the differences of fiqh found within the madzhabs (sects) are based on the fuqaha’s own Qiraat. Thus this paper is a discussion on the differences of wajh Qiraat within the farsh letters as found among the Qiraat scholars. This paper also analyses the relationship and influence of the Qiraat readings among the fuqaha when it comes to deriving a hukm (principle), particularly on fiqh ibadah (the laws of worship). As such, this significant study sheds light into the approach used by the fuqaha’ when it comes to extracting and deriving laws and principles based on the different Qiraat readings. The objectives of this study are to investigate the extent and role of Qiraat, to analyse and observe the relationship between Qiraat readings of the fuqaha and its relationship to the hukm. This study is based entirely on library research. Overall, the findings show that Qiraat is undoubtedly important; the differences in Qiraat have a major impact in the way that the various Islamic Fiqh were derived from the Qur’anic verses. Nevertheless, the chosen Qiraat readings by Fuqaha, on the other hand, do not play a major role in determining the fiqh within the various sects; instead the wajh Qiraat plays a major role within their respective sects. However, in some circumstances, the chosen Qiraat readings do sometimes become a source which a hukm is decided within their sects, and vice versa. It is hoped that this study becomes a pioneer for other researchers to conduct a more in-depth study on the sciences of Qiraat by exploring it critically within the various perspectives of the Islamic discipline. It is hoped that it can be analysed, studied, understood and implemented in the field of teaching and learning, in line with its importance within the other branches of Islamic discipline. It is hoped that as a study, it can be further expanded and remain significant to the Islamic scholars and the community at large. Keyword: Qiraat Mutawatirah, Fiqh, Qiraat, fuqaha‘   Penulisan ini bertujuan merungkai hubungan rapat Qiraat dalam disiplin ilmu Islam terutamanya ilmu Fiqh. Qiraat menjadi salah satu faktor yang dominan terutamanya dalam mencorakkan perbezaan hukum Fiqh Islami dalam kalangan Fuqaha’. Namun masih terdapat kalangan yang kurang mengetahui dan memahami hakikat kewujudan ilmu Qiraat sehingga menimbulkan kekeliruan dan kesamaran mengenainya bahkan wujudnya pendapat menyatakan bahawa hukum fiqh yang diinstibatkan dalam mazhab adalah berdasarkan daripada Qiraat yang dibaca oleh kalangan fuqaha itu sendiri. Justeru kajian ini akan menyentuh dan membincangkan perbezaan wajh qiraat yang terdapat pada farsh huruf dalam kalangan ulama Qiraat. Dalam masa yang sama, kajian ini juga akan menyingkap dan menganalisis perkaitan dan pengaruhnya terhadap pengeluaran hukum oleh kalangan Fuqaha’ terutama ayat-ayat al-Quran yang melibatkan fiqh ibadat. Kajian ini penting demi memahami keadaan sebenar bagaimana kalangan Fuqaha mengeluarkan hukum fiqh berdasarkan perbezaan Qiraat. Objektif kajian ialah mengkaji sejauhmana perkaitan dan peranan Qiraat pada hukum fiqh, menganalisis dan menilai sejauh mana pertalian bacaan Qiraat yang dibaca Fuqaha’ dengan hukum yang diinstibatkan oleh Fuqaha.’ Secara keseluruhannya, kajian ini dijalankan berdasarkan kajian ke perpustakaan sepenuhnya. Ternyata dapatan hasil kajian ini merumuskan bahawa perbezaan Qiraat pula memberi impak yang besar dalam mencorakkan hukum fiqh dalam ayat al-Quran. Bacaan ‘Qiraat PilihanFuqaha‘ pula tidaklah menjadi faktor utama mempengaruhi hukum fiqh mazhab yang diasaskan oleh mereka bahkan fuqaha hanya menjadikan wajh Qiraat itu sebagai platform utama dalam menentukan hukum fiqh dalam mazhab yang diasaskan mereka. Namun tidak dinafikan juga, bacaan ‘Qiraat Pilihan Fuqaha‘ itu kekadang menjadi sebab penentuan hukum bagi mazhab mereka dan kekadangnya sebaliknya. Kajian ini diharap menjadi perintis kepada pengkaji yang lain untuk lebih prolifik mengenai ilmu Qiraat dalam membahaskannya dari pelbagai sudut disiplin ilmu Islam secara lebih kritis supaya ia dapat ditelaah, dikaji, difahami, diperkasai dan diimplimentasikan dalam aspek pengajaran dan pembelajaran sejajar dengan kepentingannya terhadap cabangan ilmu-ilmu Islam yang lain agar terus berkembang dan bertapak pada kaca mata Ilmuan Islam secara khusus dan masyarakat sejagat secara umumnya.   Kata Kunci: Qiraat Mutawatirah, Fiqh, Qiraat, fuqaha‘.


2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 673-688 ◽  
Author(s):  
PAUL MERCHANT

AbstractThis paper is concerned with the use of interviews with scientists by members of two disciplinary communities: oral historians and historians of science. It examines the disparity between the way in which historians of science approach autobiographies and biographies of scientists on the one hand, and the way in which they approach interviews with scientists on the other. It also examines the tension in the work of oral historians between a long-standing ambition to record forms of past experience and more recent concerns with narrative and personal ‘composure’. Drawing on extended life story interviews with scientists, recorded by National Life Stories at the British Library between 2011 and 2016, it points to two ways in which the communities might learn from each other. First, engagement with certain theoretical innovations in the discipline of oral history from the 1980s might encourage historians of science to extend their already well-developed critical analysis of written autobiography and biography to interviews with scientists. Second, the keen interest of historians of science in using interviews to reconstruct details of past events and experience might encourage oral historians to continue to value this use of oral history even after their theoretical turn.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-238
Author(s):  
Nikos Vergis

AbstractDoes having a communicative role other than the speaker’s make a difference to the way pragmatic meaning is construed? Standard paradigms in interpersonal pragmatics have implicitly assumed a speaker-centric perspective over the years, however modern approaches have re-considered the role of listener evaluations. In the present study, I examine whether assuming different communicative roles (speaker, listener, observer) results in varying interpretations. A web-based experiment revealed that participants who took the perspective of different characters in short stories differed in the way they interpreted what the speaker meant. In most cases, participants in the role of the listener interpreted speaker meaning in more negative ways than participants in the other roles. The present study suggests that the directionality of the difference (negative inferences under the listener’s perspective) could be explained by taking into account affective factors.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kiera Lindsey

This article discusses a recent art project created by the Wiradjuri and Kamilaroi artist Jonathon Jones, which was commissioned to commemorate the opening of the revitalized Hyde Park Barracks in Sydney in early 2020. Jones’ work involves a dramatic installation of red and white crushed stones laid throughout the grounds of the barracks, merging the image of the emu footprint with that of the English broad convict arrow to ‘consider Australia’s layered history and contemporary cultural relations’. This work was accompanied by a ‘specially-curated programme’ of performances, workshops, storytelling and Artist Talks. Together, these elements were designed to unpack how certain ‘stories determine the ways we came together as a nation’. As one of the speakers of the Artist Talk’s programme, I had a unique opportunity to experiment with what colleagues and I have been calling ‘Creative histories’ in reference to the way some artists and historians are choosing to communicate their research about the past in ways that experiment with form and function and push disciplinary or generic boundaries. This article reflects upon how these two distinct creative history projects – one visual art, the other performative – renegotiate the complex and contested pasts of the Hyde Park Barracks. I suggest that both examples speak to the role of memory and creativity in shaping cultural responses to Australia’s colonial past, while Jones' programme illustrates how Indigenous artists and academics are making a profound intervention into contemporary understandings of how history is ‘done’ in Australia.


1989 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-67

We have come to the human dimension in this discussion. It would, therefore, be useful for us to consider two different ways of approaching this. One is talking about people at arm's length, in the way we have been doing most of the day; to a certain extent we have had to do so, as social scientists or even as humanists. I am going to try the other approach, namely, to talk about a few individuals to see if there is anything there that might help us in understanding the nationality question. My subject is literature and language. First, I will cover literature as an instrument, as something of interest to social scientists; and then I will discuss certain important individuals. As far as the nationality question is concerned, the individual does matter, although, it seems, the Party places that aspect at the bottom of its list of nationality concerns deemed important.


Antichthon ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 45 ◽  
pp. 58-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Burton

AbstractThis paper discusses a series of archaic poems in which one poet responds directly to the work of another, identifying the other by name or by direct allusion (for example, Simonides frag. 542 PMG, Solon frag. 20 West, Sappho frag. 137 Voigt). Such responses often disagree with their models, and this disagreement is frequently constructed in terms of a correction, not only to the subject matter, but also to the way in which the original is composed. These responses, therefore, not only reflect the pattern of improvisation and ‘capping’ common to much Greek poetry, but form an ongoing debate on the nature and role of the poet and his poetry. The construction of such responses also serves to underline both the importance of improvisation and the permanency of the fame conveyed by the completed poem.


2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Floyd

Critical analysis of the biotechnological reproduction of biological life increasingly emphasises the role of value-producing labour in biotechnologically reproductive processes, while also arguing that Marx’s use of the terms ‘labour’ and ‘value’ is inadequate to the critical scrutiny of these processes. Focusing especially on the reformulation of the value-labour relation in recent work in this area by Melinda Cooper and Catherine Waldby, this paper both critiques this reformulation and questions the explanatory efficacy of the category ‘labour’ in this context. Emphasising the contemporary global expansion of capital relative to value-producing labour – specifically, the expansion of fictitious capital and debt on the one hand, and of global surplus populations on the other – it argues that this reformulation misrepresents the mediated capacities of capital as the immediate capacities of labour. This reformulation, moreover, is indicative of broader tendencies in the contemporary theorisation of labour, tendencies exemplified by autonomist Marxism.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document