Making time/breaking time: critical literacy and politics of time in data visualisation

PurposeRepresentations of time are commonly used to construct narratives in visualisations of data. However, since time is a value-laden concept, and no representation can provide a full, objective account of “temporal reality”, they are also biased and political: reproducing and reinforcing certain views and values at the expense of alternative ones. This conceptual paper aims to explore expressions of temporal bias and politics in data visualisation, along with possibly mitigating user approaches and design strategies.Design/methodology/approachThis study presents a theoretical framework rooted in a sociotechnical view of representations as biased and political, combined with perspectives from critical literacy, radical literacy and critical design. The framework provides a basis for discussion of various types and effects of temporal bias in visualisation. Empirical examples from previous research and public resources illustrate the arguments.FindingsFour types of political effects of temporal bias in visualisations are presented, expressed as limitation of view, disregard of variation, oppression of social groups and misrepresentation of topic and suggest that appropriate critical and radical literacy approaches require users and designers to critique, contextualise, counter and cross beyond expressions of the same. Supporting critical design strategies involve the inclusion of multiple datasets and representations; broad access to flexible tools; and inclusive participation of marginalised groups.Originality/valueThe paper draws attention to a vital, yet little researched problem of temporal representation in visualisations of data. It offers a pioneering bridging of critical literacy, radical literacy and critical design and emphasises mutual rather than contradictory interests of the empirical sciences and humanities.

“For Heaven to Bend to the Earth” or the Christian Thought in Vaižgantas’s Journalism

Literary theology, which began to form in the second half of the 20th century, opened up new possibilities for linking religion, literature, and personal experience. The journalistic articles of Juozas Tumas-Vaižgantas (1869–1933) show that, on the one hand, he understood the world in a crystcentric way. On the other hand, Vaižgantas’s thought was also shaped by modernity and the time he lived in, which inclined him to reject religion. By analysing Vaižgantas’s journalistic articles and letters to his relatives, this article argues that the writer’s modernity rests on the interaction of the two realities: the eternal reality of God and the temporal reality of man. Having managed to combine these two realities with his human presence, Vaižgantas has opened up to our culture the dynamics of this interaction, in which the Christian self-restraint and modern consciousness, acting as complementary parts, become an act of self-creation founded on rational will, which in turn is associated with self-control, moderation, determination, and renunciation of egoism.

The Ascension of Christ and Permanent Ecclesiogenesis: A Contribution to Pneumatological and Eschatological Ecclesiology

What is the Ascension? Is it merely a narrative of a post-paschal community? In what spatio-temporal reality has it been fulfilled? How should we understand its placement in time: forty days after the Resurrection, and ten days prior to the Descent of the Holy Spirit? The Ascension should be analyzed integrally in connection with the mystery of death and the Resurrection. This paper presents an attempt at deepening New-Testament ecclesiogenesis while also moving away from the narrowed understanding that the Church emerged solely as a result of the words, deeds and person of Jesus Christ. On the one hand, it is a reference to the five stages of the Church's emergence as an event of the entire Holy Trinity in the still-unfinished history of salvation. On the other: it is a presentation of the typically ignored of the Ascension, which is usually reduced to the event of the Resurrection of the glorious Lord. Analysis of the Ascension – performed in the light of ecclesiogenesis – leads to uncovering the pneumatological and eschatological components, which are most interesting in reference to the multi-dimensional establishment of the Church and its mission.

Is There Change on the B-Theory of Time?

The purpose of this paper is to explore the connection between change and the B-theory of time, sometimes also called the Scientific view of time, according to which reality is a four-dimensional spacetime manifold, where past, present and future things equally exist, and the present time and non-present times are metaphysically the same. I argue in favour of a novel response to the much-vexed question of whether there is change on the B-theory or not. In fact, B-theorists are often said to hold a ‘static’ view of time. But this far from being innocent label: if the B-theory of time presents a model of temporal reality that is static, then there is no change on the B-theory. From this, one can reasonably think as follows: of course, there is change, so the B-theory must be false. What I plan to do in this paper is to argue that in some sense there is change on the B-theory, but in some other sense, there is no change on the B-theory. To do so, I present three instances of change: Existential Change, namely the view that things change with respect to their existence over time; Qualitative Change, the view that things change with respect to how they are over time; Propositional Change, namely the view that things (i.e. propositions) change with respect to truth value over time. I argue that while there is a reading of these three instances of change that is true on the B-theory, and so there is change on the B-theory in this sense, there is a B-theoretical reading of each of them that is not true on the B-theory, and therefore there is no change on the B-theory in this other sense.

Nefarious Presentism: A Recourse to Primitivism

Presentism is one of the various views in the discourse on the existence of time and spatio-temporal reality which holds that only the present is real and also that only present things exist. Neil McKinnon characterizes presentism in some ways that are all problematic, although he claims that the most appealing of all is the statement that “only present entities exist.” This view permeates all thoughts about presentism, and it has led to problems about the formulation of presentism. The link between accepting the existence of a temporal part (present) and the events that have that part as its spatio-temporal reference creates a hub of debate among presentists, and this raises a lot of issues not just in metaphysics, but in other areas of philosophical discourse as well. Tallant and Ingram take a challenging position on this issue as presentists in their own right. For them, the requisite status of a presentist properly so-called should be of a commitment to the reality of the present exclusively. In this paper, I engage the views of Tallant and Ingram on the problems of presentism such as triviality and truthmaking as regards ontological implications. I will argue that the avoidance of ontological commitment in nefarious presentism does appear to avoid the problem of truthmaking, which implies avoiding an analysis of truth in order to solve the problem of truthmaking. I will also argue that this avoidance to address the principle of un-analyzability of thisness is a recourse to primitivism.

Children's spatial thinking in regional geographical knowledge

The primary basis of any scientific perception of spatio–temporal reality is geographical space. This logical position is revealed by the authors of this article in relation to the development of spatial thinking of school-age children, formed within the framework of knowledge of the surrounding reality and a complete geographical picture of the world, characterized by regional features. Based on the study of theoretical material and analysis of experimental research results, General approaches to a realistic understanding of multilevel perception of space by children based on the realization of their own potential are formulated.

Apperception and the Unreality of Tense

The aim of this essay is to characterize the issue whether tense is real. Roughly, this is the issue whether, given any tensed representation, its tense corresponds in some suitably direct way to some feature of reality. The task is to make this less rough. Eight characterizations of the issue are considered and rejected, before one is endorsed. On this characterization, the unreality of tense is equivalent to the unity of temporal reality. The issue whether tense is real, so characterized, is then related to Kant’s deduction of the categories in his Critique of Pure Reason. It is argued that Kant’s deduction does not provide the argument for the unreality of tense that it may appear to. The conclusion drawn at the end of the essay is that the unreality of tense cannot be argued for—not because tense is real, but because, even if it is unreal, its unreality is basic.

Time, metaphysics of

Perhaps the most important dispute in the metaphysics of time is over the passage of time. There are two basic metaphysical theories of time in this dispute. There is the A-theory of time, according to which the common sense distinction between the past, present and future reflects a real ontological distinction, and time is dynamic: what was future, is now present and will be past. Then there is the B-theory of time, according to which there is no ontological distinction between past, present and future. The fact that we draw this distinction in ordinary life is a reflection of our perspective on temporal reality, rather than a reflection of the nature of time itself. A corollary of denying that there is a distinction between past, present and future is that time is not dynamic in the way just described. The A-theory is also variously referred to as the tensed theory, or the dynamic theory of time. The B-theory is also referred to as the tenseless theory, or the static, or block universe theory of time. The A-theory comes in various forms, which take differing positions on the ontological status granted to the past, present and future. According to some versions, events in the past, present and future are all real, but what distinguishes them is their possession of the property of pastness, presentness or futurity. A variation of this view is that events are less real the more distantly past or future they are. Others hold that only the past and present are real; the future has yet to come into existence. Still others, presentists, hold that only the present is real. Events in the past did exist, but exist no longer, and events in the future will exist, but do not yet exist. According to the B-theory, all events, no matter when they occur, are equally real. The temporal location of an event has no effect on its ontological status, just as the spatial location of an event has no effect on its ontological status, although this analogy is controversial. The A-theory has a greater claim to being the theory that reflects the common sense view about time. Consequently, the burden of proof is often thought to be on the B-theorist. If we are to give up the theory of time most closely aligned with common sense, it is argued, there must be overwhelming reasons for doing so. However, the A-theory is not without its problems. McTaggart put forward an argument that an objective passage of time would be incoherent, so any theory that requires one cannot be true. The A-theory also appears to be, prima facie, inconsistent with the special theory of relativity, a well-confirmed scientific theory. Although the B-theory is less in line with common sense than the A-theory, it is more in line with scientific thinking about time. According to the special theory of relativity, time is but one dimension of a four-dimensional entity called spacetime. The B-theory sees time as very similar to space, so it naturally lends itself to this view. However, it faces the problem of reconciling itself with our ordinary experience of time. Because the two theories about time are mutually exclusive, and are also thought to exhaust the possible range of metaphysical theories of time, arguments in favour of one theory often take the form of arguments against the other theory. If there is a good reason for thinking that the A-theory of time is false, then that is equally a good reason for thinking that the B-theory of time is true, and vice versa.

THE ROLE OF THE EDUCATIONAL IDEOLOGY IN THE FORMATION OF THE OSSETIAN LITERATURE

В результате вхождения Осетии в состав Российского государства в XIX в. и связанных с этим модернизационных процессов зарождается осетинское просветительство. Просветительство довершило духовную работу построения новой мировоззренческой картины мира. Учась в русских школах, первые осетинские просветители хорошо знали русский язык, русскую культуру и литературу. На их становление огромное влияние оказала русская общественно-политическая и философско-эстетическая мысль. В целом принципы идеологии осетинских просветителей составляли: принцип труда, принцип совести, принцип самосовершенствования, принцип добра, принцип свободы и т.д. И поскольку первые осетинские просветители являлись и первыми писателями, то данные принципы были ими заложены в качестве прочного фундамента формирующейся осетинской литературы, которую они воспринимали как важнейшую общественную трибуну. Философские и общественно-политические взгляды осетинских просветителей содержались в их художественном творчестве, публицистике, активно проявлялись в их реальной жизненной позиции, деятельности, поступках и поведении. Они не занимались теоретическими рассуждениями по поводу вопросов о сущности бытия, устройстве мироздания и о природе человеческого познания. Однако сущность человеческого бытия в реальной конкретике его пространственно-временной данности («здесь и сейчас») просветителей, безусловно, была целью всех их философских исканий, краеугольным камнем их этических представлений и их этического учения в целом. В данной статье рассматривается, как в формирующейся осетинской литературе, в частности, в произведениях таких просветителей-писателей, как И. Кануков, С. Гадиев и К. Хетагуров, реализуются важнейшие принципы труда, свободы, совести, определившие гуманистическую направленность осетинской художественной литературы на сложнейшем этапе ее становления. The Ossetian enlightenment starts with Ossetia joining the Russian state in the XIX century. The enlightenment completed the spiritual work of forming a new philosophical perception of the world. The first Ossetian enlighteners studied in Russian schools and, consequently they knew the Russian language, Russian culture and literature and were greatly influenced by the advanced Russian public, political and philosophical and aesthetic ideas. General principles of the ideology of Ossetian enlighteners were: the principle of labor, the principle of conscience, the principle of self-improvement, the principle of good, the principle of freedom, etc. And since the first Ossetian enlighteners became first writers, these principles were laid as a solid foundation for emerging Ossetian literature, which they perceived as the most important public platform. Philosophical and socio-political views of the Ossetian enlighteners were enclosed in their artistic creativity, journalism, actively manifested in their real-life positions, activities, actions and behavior. They did not engage in theoretical arguments concerning questions about the nature of existence, the structure of the universe and about the nature of human cognition. However, the essence of human existence in the real specifics of its spatial-temporal reality (“here and now”) of the enlightenment, of course, was the goal of their philosophical quest, a cornerstone of their ethical views and their ethical teachings as a whole. This article discusses, how in the emerging Ossetian literature, particularly the works of such enlightenment writers as I. Kanukov, S. Gadiyev and K. Khetagurov, the important principles of work, freedom of conscience, which determined the humanistic orientation of the Ossetian literature at the most difficult stage of its development, were implemented.