Yasmin List

Monday, November 18, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 19, Issue 1

Sunday, November 17, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 18, Issue 3

Send Yasmin_discussions mailing list submissions to
yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://ntlab.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
yasmin_discussions-request@ntlab.gr

You can reach the person managing the list at
yasmin_discussions-owner@ntlab.gr

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Yasmin_discussions digest..."

THIS IS THE YASMIN-DISCUSSIONS DIGEST

Today's Topics:

1. WWWWASP Discussion - Third week (YASMIN DISCUSSIONS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 11:16:11 +1100
From: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr>
To: yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] WWWWASP Discussion - Third week
Message-ID:
<mailman.2.1573942709.23077.yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr@ntlab.gr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi all,

I would like to follow with the kind of ?strong statements? strategy, just
to, hopefully, heat it up our discussion.

I would like to add something following the direction from Salom?
contribution. I agree with Salome that biotechnology, or bioinformatics
has an intrinsic difference to the current Bioart, or , why not, a possible
Biohistory. In her words, ?comparing helps to understand?, but in the first
cases (Technology + Science; or Science + Science), we are developing
alternative technical skills. In the second cases (Science + Arts, or
Science + Humanities), yes, it is true that we are developing alternative
technical skills, which is totally true an interesting, but at the same
time we are including ?contexts?. We can discuss if the context is already
in the first ones (Nanobiotechnology, for example). I would say that, yes,
it is there, but in an implicit state. So, the second approach (we can say,
?second order interdisciplinarities?), context is recovered explicitly. So,
then, history, for example, becomes an important issue to be analized
inside a ?technical? framework (or esthetics, or poetics, or politics ?). I
do not like to use the word ?technical? here, because I m the kind of
person that strongly support that a pencil and a paper are great technical
tools, which push us to many interesting human actions. But, when we
arrange disciplines following this ?second order? approach, the recovering
of contextual links is made explicitly. This means with the participation
of our mutual self-awareness. And this is an important difference.

Following with Salome statement, which I think may be it has been expressed
by our invited discussants in different forms too. Why is this so
important? Well, it allows to follow our understanding guided by our
contextual relations, as then we are claiming that is not the technical
subject, is not only the concepts, are these inside the context, and the
context is very hybridized. As Roger claimed many times, this does not mean
that the specialized knowledge does not play a role. On the contrary,
specialized, and deep technical knowledge is helpful and it is needed (and
here we can define this as the ?first order interdsiciplinarities? =
nano-bio-thermodynamics), but the second order are helpful too re-linking
us to our contexts, and bridging our shared results and communities, and
hence helping to understand by comparation in different scales (orders).

I think this was kind of a shared though by all of us. However, here I
would like to put another statement. Usually, and it has been addressed a
couple of times in our discussion, this kind of interdisciplinary relations
is much more understood and much more followed inside the artistic and the
humanities communities. However, in my point of view, and due to the
explicit relation with the contextual information in both art and
humanities (which these disciplines are usually more open to be interested
in the science progress and the main science breakthroughs, or at least
this is my impresion), the main advantages when including these are for the
Science community. We, as a former students, and then as professional
researchers, are totally explicitly un-linked to history, to economics, to
philosophy, ?, We are not questioning ourselfs ?what does it mean
productivity??, we have totally removed from our day to day practice any
critical framework. Well, it is true that there are many scientist with
highly critical thinking, but it is not included in our standard education.
This is something that you can create by your own, in the best case. And
this does not mean that this independent or self-education is not
important, or even is not desired (of course, to have lateral and
peripheral educational resources sounds like very good), but the important
may be is that it is not understood as a necessity. However, we can find
everywhere how the meaning of science is becoming more and more closed. We
are approaching a point where science = applied science. Or even worse,
when science = industrial science. Excuse me, I m not saying that link
production, engage industry and entrepreneurship with science is bad at
all. I m just saying that when we pack the meaning of science in this very
restrictive definition, we are just developing a science which is smaller,
and poorer. So, to be honest, I think this is a very important battle for
the science community, and it is very surprising how we, as a community,
are the less engaged circle by far. May be we are the community that are
losing more when not do in it. As I said, I think actual arts and
humanities can develop a better equilibrium education from technical and
contextual frameworks.

Finally, and linking to the word ?necessity?, may be we can follow a link
to our Institutional Vs micro-actions analysis. With the risk to be
simplistic, ad sorry if these words are (remember, I m just trying to heat
it up), may be we can link our educational necessities to institutional
framework, in some extent. I m not saying that our micro-actions does not
represents a necessity. In fact, I do think. However, in words of Marina
Garces (Spanish Philosopher), we do need to recover the meaning of ?us?,
and may be we are just letting go away the institutional framework from
?us?. Could be nowadays we can recover our public institutions to work for
?us?. I know that this is kind of hyper-utopian, and may be even naive
statement, which is always dangerous. But I don t think why we should loose
the institutional spaces, as these spaces are public, and could be
represent a public track to recover our link to ?us? too. Sure, from the
ruins and shambles, but we all know many different spaces that are being
included in these institutional framework, and at the same time are linked
to our micro-negotiations reservoirs.

Hoping that we can re-start our discussing next week with all your voices
from all around the globe.

Cheers,

Guillermo.

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr
http://ntlab.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr

------------------------------

End of Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 18, Issue 3
*************************************************

Tuesday, November 12, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 18, Issue 2

Send Yasmin_discussions mailing list submissions to
yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://ntlab.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
yasmin_discussions-request@ntlab.gr

You can reach the person managing the list at
yasmin_discussions-owner@ntlab.gr

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Yasmin_discussions digest..."

THIS IS THE YASMIN-DISCUSSIONS DIGEST

Today's Topics:

1. reply to joel: is artscience a new discipline or do we need
other concepts (YASMIN DISCUSSIONS)
2. WWWWASP Discussion (YASMIN DISCUSSIONS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2019 12:20:19 -0600
From: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr>
To: yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] reply to joel: is artscience a new
discipline or do we need other concepts
Message-ID:
<mailman.1.1573542783.4565.yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr@ntlab.gr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

yasminers

i think i am replying to joel- for some reason the archive doesnt give
the email address of people who
post- please sign your posts !!
roger malina

the question raised by 'joel' is:

"""I've been dipping in and out of this discussion and it fascinates
me because it reflects an attempt to bring our ruminations on the
Art-Science connection from the abstract to the concrete, specifically
with respect to education. In that regard I would like to offer the
following based on my experiences.

There has been considerable talk about whether or not the Art-Science
connection could, or has, yielded a new discipline, much in the way
new disciplines have emerged in the past from the intersection of
other, more established areas of inquiry.""

my response to this:
so: is artscience a new emerging discipline or do we need a new
concept of how to substructure knowledge, and knowledge creating
institutions?

a) an easy point. Almost all human organisations are 'tree structured
hierarchies". There is typically one 'ceo' or 'president' of the
organisation, with deputies, and then various subdivisions (schools
and departments). There some discussion in the business world of
'horizontal organisations', the need for 'floating' employees etc

perhaps the last failed attempts are centered on creating schools of
'interdisciplinary studies' that started in the 1990s. Most of these
have disappeared or have failed to achieve the promised goals of their
founders.

perhaps one opportunity for new approaches to the problem of recurrent
problem of bridging disciplines is the new phase of non institinal or
place based learning, ie on line education. During the era of TV,
there were TV based universities which tended still to have discipline
based programs. With on line learning, and the emergence of'on line
certificates, perhaps an individual can 'aggregate' on line
certificates in a transdisciplinary way to create 'diplomas'. In our
artscilab at UTD through the HERMES project led by alex topete we will
start awarding certificates for 'transdisciplinary apprenticeships'
via EdX certificates.

in the meantime we all will continue to struggle, as people have for
centuries, to create intyer.mutli/transdisciplinary temporary
structures in hierarchical tree structure universities. There is no
best method for artscience, but hopefully many good ones.

a totally separate discussion to the institutional structuring of
knowledge creation industries are the
philosophica/ontological.epistemological approaches which need not
match institutional structuring of knowlege
except if you want to make a living doing it !!

J then goes on:
I've been involved in two such areas that have been "around" for
quite some time.

The first is computer animation and, more specifically, character
animation. When I teach character animation to computer science
students, I cover not only the mechanical, mathematical aspects of
animation, I also address the biology of humans, their skeletal
structure, how muscles control motion, etc. I also present students
with a discussion of physics and locomotion, and how the two are
related. Yet, in addition to these scientific underpinnings of
animation, I also address the aesthetic aspects of motion and
animation, such as color, lighting, composition, etc.

A second area that has emerged as of late is that of Digital Media,
which at my university is a combination of Art, Communications, and
Computer Science. This new major has a series of four courses that act
as the backbone for the degree. These four courses comprise topics
that arise at the intersection of Art, Communications and Computer
Science, and as such demonstrate how each of these "feeder"
disciplines feeds off each other in the creation of a new discipline.

I'd love to hear other, concrete examples from my fellow Yasminers!

my thoughts

indeed throughout history new areas of practice have 'emerged' by
combining several existing disciplines like your examples of digital
media or computer animation - indeed- in our ATEC school at UTDallas
we call this now 'animationx' and animation includes not only
character animation , but also data animation which in data science is
an emerging area of interest

my own example is that I myself got a PhD in astrophysics-- but course
in the 19th century this discipline did not exist- we had astronomy
and physics and after 50 years of squabling it became astrophysics-
though some universities still call it astronomy, and include physics
within the research methods of astronomy, and others call it physics
with a sub discipline of astrophysics depending on how the
institutional squabbling and turf wars were resolved ( see randall
collins 'sociology of philosophy' to understand the interplay betweeen
epsitemology and sociology.

thanks J-sorry i cant find your actual name-when you reply please sign
your email !

roger malina

------------------------------
Roger is in Dallas
whatsapp, eechat , messenger+1-510-853-2007 and +33680459447 in
europe.This email address for leonardo related work,
rmalina@alum.mit.edu use roger.malina@utdallas.edu for UTD work

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:36:27 +0100
From: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr>
To: yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] WWWWASP Discussion
Message-ID:
<mailman.2.1573546713.4565.yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr@ntlab.gr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

Dear Yasminers,

As Guillermo mentions, in our Visual and Multimedia Art Master's degree,
his? collaboration has always consisted in communicating complex
scientific? concepts to confront art students with knowledge that
escapes their language and the methods they dominate in their research.
We do not choose science popularization as a vehicle to get familiar
with these new concepts. On the contrary, Guillermo used the newest
science published papers. This introduces a relevant factor, the idea of
receiving first-hand information about complex and technical content.
All along these years I have used this strategy with experts in forensic
medicine, synthetic biology or bioinformatics and I could conclude that
comparing helps to understand. It also allows to relate the artistic
concerns with the scientific devices and concepts, generating multiple
disciplinary crosses such as bioart. However, I do not believe that this
final practice constitutes a new discipline such as biochemistry.

I agree with Roger in his statement on the hierarchies: the scientist
has the fundamental resources in the university (labs, expensive
infrastructure, human resources, etc.), although the artist develops his
teaching work in the university and his role as researcher / artist is
performed outside (atelier). Opening the doors of scientific
laboratories to artists should be an objective of the whole university
institution itself, since questioning from multiple perspectives is
beneficial to all; beyond publications in high impact journals and
though patents, much consideration in these directions is needed. To
what extent does research contribute to the changing relationship
between humans and world? Which are the social
implications?

Best wishes,

--
Salom? Cuesta
Dir. Dpto. Escultura
Universitat Polit?cnica de Val?ncia

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7898-8093

----- CONTACTO----
email:sacuesta@esc.upv.es
Tel: (34) 96 38 77 007 Ext. Int. 74801/14825
M?vil: 689 285 254
Fax:(34) 96 387 74 89
--------------------------
Universitat Polit?cnica de Val?ncia:http://www.upv.es
Departamento Escultura:http://www.upv.es/entidades/DE/index-es.html
Grupo de Investigaci?n Laboratorio de Luz:http://www.laboluz.com
M?ster Oficial en Artes Visuales y Multimedia:
http://www.artesvisualesymultimedia.com
http://www.facebook.com/masterAVM

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr
http://ntlab.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr

------------------------------

End of Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 18, Issue 2
*************************************************

Monday, November 11, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1

Send Yasmin_discussions mailing list submissions to
yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://ntlab.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
yasmin_discussions-request@ntlab.gr

You can reach the person managing the list at
yasmin_discussions-owner@ntlab.gr

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Yasmin_discussions digest..."

THIS IS THE YASMIN-DISCUSSIONS DIGEST

Today's Topics:

1. WWWWASP Discussion (YASMIN DISCUSSIONS)
2. WWWWASP Discussion - Reply to Annick Bureaud 2?
(YASMIN DISCUSSIONS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2019 11:22:22 +0800
From: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr>
To: "=?utf-8?B?eWFzbWluX2Rpc2N1c3Npb25zQG50bGFiLmdy?="
<yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr>
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] WWWWASP Discussion
Message-ID:
<mailman.6.1573406761.22026.yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr@ntlab.gr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Jing (CJ) Chen, Professor of Arts,  Associate Director of the Art and Cultural Innovation and Creativity (ACIC) Lab, Nanjing University. 

Based at the School of Arts in Nanjing University, the Art and Cultural Innovation and Creativity (ACIC) Lab is pursuing to merge the gap between the arts/culture and science/technology and provide the hands-on opportunities for non-trained students from the different disciplines to work together and with experienced scientists, researchers, and technicians from universities, enterprises and institutes. We launched this project in 2017 and have organized a series of workshops on Virtual Reality, Artificial Intelligence, Service Design, Geographic Information System, and Text mining, etc. and more than 500 students have been taken the courses and started their projects.

The idea behind the lab is that we think students are potential scientists and artists without a fixed and stable indemnity of scientists or artists. They may work in different fields but with the scientist thinking, creative ability, artistic aesthetics, and digital literacy, which are embedded in the workshop, courses, seminars, and lectures designed by us. The lab plays the role of platform and coordination and provides the opportunity for students to try something new, get in touch with some person they want to know and experience things they never expected.

However, doing this in China or Chinese universities is not very easy. Firstly, we have a very strong discipline tradition so all the resources are distributed based on the disciplines. The lab is cross-disciplinary and requests the fund and faculties from multi-disciplines. It?s even harder for us to collaborate with scientists in our university than others. Secondly, the students we recruited are mostly from humanities rather than sciences and engineering which causes additional difficulties for teaching since humanities students don?t know much about the technology, software, and tools. We are adjusting our strategies all the time to find a better way to get students into the environment comfortably and confidently. Thirdly, the collaboration between us and scientists in China is still rare. It happens mostly at the individual level and hard to get funds supported. The biggest obstacle is the revaluation of the outcome. The two or three culture idea is widely accepted by scientists, artists/humanists, which make them don?t think it?s necessary to talk to each other. Recently because the AI booming in China, more scientists and artists notice the value of the combination of art and technology but there is still a big gap between the two sides. They don?t know how to talk to each other due to lacking understanding.

I have faith in young people but I also think what we do is important. If we can bridge the gap and provide more dialogue opportunities for artists and scientist then the young people would be easier to get understand and practice with two parts without fear and hesitation.

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 13:09:48 +1100
From: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr>
To: yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] WWWWASP Discussion - Reply to Annick
Bureaud 2?
Message-ID:
<mailman.7.1573406824.22026.yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr@ntlab.gr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

I had the feeling that my last reply to Annick was slightly soft, in the
sense to propose a kind of balance between micro-actions and institutional
engagement. And this could be kind of good practice: equilibrium, balance,
dialogue, ... However, maybe in our highly conflicting present we should
try, or to push to harder statements. Let s see how it goes:

In the same direction of the re-designing science program, I think Art/Sci
institutionalization could serve as a framework to stop a possible
fake-science scenario. This is just entering into a deep political action,
although educational too. Nowadays, science research is governed by
excellence and elite criteria, and I m sure that the same is happening in
all research areas. So, we are quantifying our research validity by
rankings, impact factors, number of papers, ... We are just including
marketing and economical criteria into our science method, as for example
pay to publish, publish or perish, ... All of this is just re-defining the
meaning of science productivity, and indirectly could be is affecting the
self science core: our methods.

With our actual stability crisis (it is very hard nowadays to find a
permanent research position, ..., and being general, to ind a permanent
job) it is very difficult (may be even impossible, or just even
intentionally not possible) to not deviate our science objectives just to a
personal CV objectives, which in practice now is occupying most of our
careers time. Someone could say that this happened always, and in some
extent can be true. Not sure. But maybe nowadays is much more intense. You
can just check the medium age to be established in academia. > 40. But,
academia, ... this word is intriguing too. Does it mean nowadays anything?
So, may be now science is just personal company business? Isn't this what
entrepreneur means? What does it mean Academia today?

All these, for sure, is affecting to our methods, and research approaches.
Today it is much more relevant to publish a super high impact factor paper,
than to publish a relevant scientific result. And this is feed by our
market trajectory. One can argue that one (market) just feeds the second
(scientific result), as it happens in the housing market (the higher the
price, the higher the quality). However, in my point of view, we are very
close to just establish a new fake word here: fake science.

This can be a very long debate, but in my point of view the art/sci program
could modify, or maybe amplify, these frictions inside science. With
art/sci institutional support you can pull the flow in one direction, or
just in the opposite. Art/sci inside science can be understood just as
another marketing tool, just to visualize and sell in a more attractive
fashion our "personal-named-company" products, or, just in the other case,
serve as a stimulus to recover a different approach to define our science
productivity, or to recover it from the past.

In summary, Art/Sci institutional support could help for the science
activism, long term productivity and knowledge not market biased, to join
directions like open science, slow science, citizen science..., where may
be an old understanding of what science mean is trying to be preserved. In
essence, Art/Sci institutional support it can help not only to do better
science (via including higher technological ways to represent, visualize
and interpret data), but to preserve the sense of its own long term
productivity, where the outcomes are not easily visualized, and where
difference and diversity are necessary research items.

Of course this can be done via the micro-actions too, and maybe even more
intensely, or more effectively, as it is kind of conflicting social issue.
But for sure it could represent an opportunity window in this direction.
So, may be the balance approach is not bad at all.

Best wishes,

Guillermo.

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin_discussions@ntlab.gr
http://ntlab.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions_ntlab.gr

------------------------------

End of Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1
*************************************************

Yasmin List

Monday, November 18, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 19, Issue 1

Sunday, November 17, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 18, Issue 3

Tuesday, November 12, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 18, Issue 2

Monday, November 11, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 18, Issue 1

Friday, November 8, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 17, Issue 4

Thursday, November 7, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 17, Issue 3

Wednesday, November 6, 2019

Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 17, Issue 2

Blog Archive