Hi all, I would love to introduce this epsitemological work about how
does artist produce knowledge called:
"Open Science: Singularity and Irruption in the Frontiers of the
Artistica Practice"
A research done by Ignacio Nieto and Marcelo Velasco who made a
qualititative approach to the works of five artsits with double
expertices (artisitic and scientific): Gilberto Esparza (mx), Perdita
Phillips (au), Rachel Mayeri (us), Susana Soares (pt) and Dmitry Bulatov
(ru).
https://adrededitora.cl/publicaciones/ciencia-abierta-open-science/
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 154, Issue 1
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2017 06:54:26 +0300
From: yasmin_discussions-request@estia.media.uoa.gr
Reply-To: yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
To: yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
Send Yasmin_discussions mailing list submissions to
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
yasmin_discussions-request@estia.media.uoa.gr
You can reach the person managing the list at
yasmin_discussions-owner@estia.media.uoa.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. Re: art*science 2017 - The New and History (Katreina Karoussos)
2. Simple Question (Gemma Anderson)
3. Re: art*science 2017 - The New and History (Ken Friedman)
4. Re: Inscribed with an Iron Tool (xDxD.vs.xDxD)
5. Nina Czegledy and Roger Malina yasmin moderators this week
(roger malina)
6. Re: art*science 2017 - The New and History (Katerna Karoussos)
7. art*science 2017 - The New and History (czegledy@interlog.com)
8. art*science 2017 - The New and History (czegledy@interlog.com)
9. Re: art*science 2017 - The New and History (Elif Ayiter)
10. R: Re: art*science 2017 - The New and History (ale_giur@yahoo.it)
11. art*science 2017 - The New and History (czegledy@interlog.com)
12. Re: art*science 2017 - The New and History (Kathelin Gray)
13. yasmin discussion and dialogue netiquette (roger malina)
14. Re: art*science 2017 - The New and History (roberta buiani)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2017 18:37:51 +0300
From: Katreina Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and
History
To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID: <A226C627-7CE8-4A38-8F91-8C25D566BF9A@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Dear Ken,
It would never seem correct if you are using the standards generated after the 15th century.
Concepts as "practical, fine and applied arts", "domains" "universities" are maybe the ones that confuse you in finding the way to acknowledge the "unified knowledge".
Techne, episteme and philosophy governed the entire era of classical Greece. If you want evidence, you can study a bit more the Parthenon and/or Greek tragedy. No one speaks about "fine and applied arts" neither about the way philosophy was recorded from the Enlightenment and on. Philosophia means to be a friend with wisdom and for the ancient Greeks wisdom was the process of contemplation.
As for Byzantium there wasn't any University but a Pandidakterion which literally means holistic education. You should go through an extended research to examine how they managed to incorporate all fields of knowledge and manifest it to a single Ekphrasis.
When i am referring to economy, I don't mean finance, although i should mention here that the ones you called "theologians" who thought that the sun stands still, were the people who funded Galileo. You should consider economy as the process of provision by which one is able to select their investment in human capital.
And this is actually where one can find the restore point. Hence, it is not about the quantity of knowledge, or else we should refer to ourselves as encyclopedists. It is more about what economy we use to acknowledge and to use this knowledge.
Katerina
> On 02 Jun 2017, at 17:04, Ken Friedman <ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Katerna,
>
> This account of an era of unified knowledge does not seem correct to me.
>
>> On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:55 PM, Katerna Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ?snip?
>
>> What seems strange to me is why, since we are discussing about cultural heritage and art - science alliance, we consider them as separate. The fragmentation in knowledge happened after the 15th century and had been established in modern era, as knowledge economy. Before that, geometry, physics, astronomy, medicine, arts, rhetoric and philosophy consisted the body of knowledge which was indivisible.
>> Hence, if we go back, searching for this specific restore point, in where the holistic knowledge was the common process of learning, researching, creating and producing, we will find all the necessary elements for retrieving the ways that this knowledge can be activated in nowadays.
>
> ?snip?
>
> First, there have been different accounts of the divisions of knowledge domains over the centuries. There has never been a time anywhere in which the several kinds of knowledge were considered whole and indivisible. The divisions of knowledge domains that dominated classical Greece and the post-Alexandrian Hellenic world did not include the practical arts or professions in the domains of philosophy. Things changed again in the medieval university, but even there, the trivium and quadrivium did not include the fine or applied arts ? while the lower faculty of philosophy was different to the higher faculties of medicine, law and theology. Medicine itself distinguished between the medical theory taught at university and the work of barber-surgeons who actually worked on patients.
>
> Second, the changes that took place in the 15th century did not come about because of any shift in economic models. What happened was the scientists began to look at the world. 15th-century physics was a branch of natural philosophy. 15th-century physics accepted much of Aristotle?s often-mistaken account translated through the lens of Ptolemy. The Copernican model that arrived in the 16th century, followed by the work of Galileo, Kepler, and Newton meant a different world. This was not a ?fragmentation? of some unified knowledge that could be ?restored.? New facts made it impossible to think of the world in a fuzzy way governed by Aristotelian physics and a version of astrophysics dominated by Biblical theology. Literalist theologians argue that the sun stood still in Joshua 10. If the Biblical account is true, it cannot be true that the earth revolves around the sun. Talking about this as ?holistic? knowledge doesn?t make sense.
>
> Third, there is significantly more to know than there was to know in the 15th century. In the 15th century, we had fewer books than the number of volumes held in the Library of Alexandria when Callimachus organized the great library catalogue known as the Pinakes. Today, we have far more. Since the time of Gutenberg?s printing press, there have been millions of books published. While I cannot track the numbers from Shanghai, I gather that Google?s estimate of the world?s books runs to nearly 129,000,000 volumes not counting the same volume more than once. If you add journal articles and other material, we?re talking about an amount of information that makes a single knowledge domain impossible.
>
> Fourth, even within recognized disciplines, it is no longer possible for anyone in any field to cover more than a tiny fraction of what there is to know. When Henri Poincar? died in 1912, he was probably the last human being to know and understand the complete mathematical corpus of the time in which he lived. As for physics or even philosophy, the notion is incredible.
>
> If my view is pessimistic, I?d be curious to know two things.
>
> First, what evidence is there for an era of unified knowledge? It seems to me that a great deal of this idea is an optimistic notion based on an inadequate understanding of the world by people who were simply wrong about how much they knew, and just as wrong about how much of what they knew was incorrect.
>
> Second, just how one can ?restore? this era in a world where there is simply too much to know. I?m not asking how we can restore the illusion of unified knowledge. Too me, that?s like the Bible museum diorama in which you can see human beings living side by side with dinosaurs, rather like a new version of the Flintstone cartoon series. I?m asking for a credible account of how it is possible for anyone to restore an era of unified knowledge in a world where nearly no one can credibly manage to know what there is, even in their own field.
>
> It is one thing to argue in favor of interdisciplinary research. It is another to do so without accounting for what we do not know, and cannot know.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Ken Friedman
>
> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>
> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 10:38:52 +0200
From: Gemma Anderson <gemma.anderson@network.rca.ac.uk>
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] Simple Question
To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID:
<CAM59yo-zGSgfssq7J+TFvmjQG-UgDMPh6MR6qBaUYt3L8ZNOgw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Dear Yasminers,
I would like to ask if you might advise journals to submit an article of
art/biology/philosophy ? I know that Leonardo is a great fit but wonder how
many other places you know that this material can be published?
Many thanks
all best,
Gemma
Dr Gemma Anderson
Artist and Lecturer in Drawing at Falmouth University
Honorary Research Fellow, Egenis, University of Exeter
Drawing Research Associate, The Big Draw, UK
http://www.gemma-anderson.co.uk/
www.cmadc.uk
http://www.isomorphology.com/
https://falmouth.academia.edu/GemmaAnderson
@Isomorphology
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2017 05:37:40 +0800
From: Ken Friedman <ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com>
Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and
History
To: Yasmin Yasmin <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID: <233BD1E2-B36C-4E56-9F6D-C8BC5429F53C@icloud.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Dear Katerina,
With respect to ancient Greece, you are mistaken. I was specifically referring to the knowledge domains as the classical Greeks understood and used them
Since we are writing in English for an international readership, I used English-language terms. I know the Greek terms. I described techne even though I used the terms ?fine and applied arts.? This was the realm of techne. Techne was a domain of knowledge that was unwritten, often tacit, and nearly never described except by masters to apprentices. Even then, techne was more often transmitted by modeling through physical example, much as a ballet master teaches dance. Navigators, smiths, artisans, sculptors, physicians and others practiced techne, and this is how they passed their knowledge on.
Some who practiced a techne were organized in special groups that resembled guilds. Some even took guild oaths vowing to keep their teaching secret within the fraternity of the guild. They agreed to teach the arts of the guild to the children of other guild members and to a few indentured apprentices, revealing these arts to no one outside the fraternity.
This was the case with the Oath of Hippocrates, the physician. Each new physician swore to honor his teacher as a second father, to share his income with his teacher as a partner, to help his teacher financially in times of need. He was to consider his teacher?s sons as his own brothers, and to teach them the art of medicine should they want to learn it with no fee and without indenture. The oath bound him to teach the medical precepts, oral instructions, and all other instruction to his own sons, the sons of his teacher, and to pupils who also took the physician?s oath ? but teach them to nobody else.
Other applied arts were organized in similar ways, some formally, some less formally. A navigator learned specific routes from a master navigator, sailing by landmarks, tides, and other indicators. If you read Mark Twain?s description of a riverboat pilot reading the water, you can see a modern rendition of the ancient navigator?s education. Peter Drucker?s 1993 book Post-Capitalist Society explains some of these issues, distinguishing the modern view from that of classical Greece.
The fine and applied arts were the opposite of those branches of philosophy that one might teach openly to all men. However, the philosophical education taught in such institutions as Plato?s Academy and Aristotle?s Lyceum were mainly available to the sons of wealthy families who could afford tuition. This elite philosophical education prepared young men for careers in public life as civic leaders, as leaders in war and peace, as rulers, and members of the government, as well as preparing those who would go on to govern and practice law.
Ancient Greek philosophy was not a matter of gaining wisdom through contemplation. These were not monks. They polished their skills through dialectic and argument more than contemplation. There are famous contemplative incidents, such as the time that Socrates stood all night in the snow, thinking. We remember this because it was unusual. It was a testimony to Socrates?s power of concentration and his detachment from bodily concerns such as cold, hunger, or the need to sleep. Most Greek philosophers lived a normal life, not the vita contemplativa resembling the life of a medieval monastic. Many were active rhetors and sophists who made a living in the market-place selling their argumentative skill, much like lawyers and management consultants today.
Philosophical education rested on rhetoric, analysis, and logic, including geometry and mathematics. Young men also engaged in sport and athletics in the context of their development, so that they would be ready to serve as warriors if the city should call.
Philosophical education had several dimensions. One was episteme ? the study of what we may know and how we may know it. The other was phronesis ? the study of wise action, how we should behave and what we should do. Such topics as rhetoric, dialectic, argumentation theory, and the branches of mathematics rounded out a full education.
Neither the Parthenon nor Tragedy provide evidence for these issues. The Parthenon and the other great physical monuments were built by specialists in the practice of a techne, a technical and artistic skill.
The great tragedians were poets, but they were citizens and gentlemen first. The tragedies had a sacred and civic dimensions. While prizes were awarded for the great works, they had a special role in classical Greek life unlike anything we know today. Only the literate and well educated had the skill required to compete writing tragic drama for the festivals ? or, to be precise, writing the three tragedies and a comic satyr play that constituted each entry.
Those who practiced a techne did not participate in the art of tragedy as the poets who wrote the plays, though craftsmen and artisans may have taken part in plays as actors or members of a chorus.
Even this was not the most important aspect of life, not for the greatest of the playwrights. Consider the life of Aeschylus, one of the two greatest, along with Sophocles. Aeschylus won the first prize more than often any playwright other than Sophocles, but he defined himself before everything else as a citizen who fought the Persians at Marathon in 490 BCE to defend democracy and he likely fought again at Salamis in 480 BCE.
For Aeschylus, pride in Athens and a sense of the common good were the heart of what it was to be a man of distinction. The words that he composed for the epitaph on his tombstone ? he probably wrote them himself ? commemorated his service as a soldier and citizen. He said nothing of his stature as the foremost poet of dramatic tragedy or the many honors he won at the festivals.
?This memorial covers Aischylos son of Euphorion ?
an Athenian, though he died at wheat-bearing Gela.
Of his glorious prowess the sacred land of Marathon can tell ?
and the long-haired Mede (Persian) who knows it well.?
Bernard Knox once wrote that the paper monuments of ancient Greece have stood longer and in better condition than the stones, and I have studied them more carefully than I have studied the Parthenon.
It is fair to say that I understand Greek tragedy. Or at least it is fair to say that I have read the tragedies. Only a few survive of the many that Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides wrote, though. Translations differ, from the florid 19th century translations to the excellent modern translations of Richmond Lattimore, the powerful renditions of Robert Fagles, and the contemporary versions of Ruby Blondell.
The tragedies contain very little about knowledge domains. These are quasi-sacred works, sacred in the sense that they were written for the great sacred occasions of civic life. The tragedies concern the deep qualities of human being, the acts of gods, human obligations toward the gods, human obligations toward one another, and the obligation to understand and to do what is right ? often at a high cost.
What I wrote yesterday was that the Greeks established knowledge domains, and that these domains were not unified. This is not a backward look imposing 15th century views or 21st century views on the men and women of the 5th century BCE. It is an account of their view as they saw it in their own time. The classical Greeks taught and transmitted techne and episteme in different ways to different kinds of people. These people did not generally share their knowledge with one another. A small farmer with a freehold and some olive groves might need to know more about managing the farm and instructing the work of his slaves than the sons of wealthy aristocrats would need to know for the management of far larger estates, but they learned none of this in the formal knowledge of the schools.
There have been many different ways that different societies defined knowledge and organized it. These involved very different kinds of distinctions about what knowledge was, who might practice different kinds of knowledge, how knowledge was to be maintained, preserved and transmitted. I am not imposing 15th-century ideas on earlier cultures. I am reporting what those cultures said of themselves.
And, yes, I know that Galileo worked for universities founded by Papal decree. It is nevertheless incorrect to say that theologians funded Galileo. The church had many arms, and the church often appointed priests to manage them. Since all ordained priests were required to study theology within their formative education, all were theologians in some sense. Relatively few, however, were professional theologians.
Since Galileo received patronage from high prelates at different points in his career, it is in a sense true that theologians funded his work ? but *not* in their capacity as theologians.
When Galileo's research moved beyond the bounds of acceptable doctrine, the Inquisition made a case against Galileo on theological grounds. The inquisitors are the theologians to whom I referred. The inquisitors acted as professional theologians within the scope of their assigned theological duties. These theologians were not the same people who funded Galileo?s earlier work.
Before dispensing advice on the research that I should do, I?d suggest that you catch up on your own reading. The Pandidakterion was, for all practical purposes, a university, and many historians describe it as a university. It did not have the university structure of the medieval Western universities, but it did have the same kinds of professional schools where people could study law and medicine, as well as other disciplines. Like many Western universities, the role of the Pandidakterion was to produce an educated professional bureaucracy to serve the needs of the state.
In the West, cathedral schools grew into universities with the right to deliver the Studium Generale, and Papal foundations generally meant this at the start. The Pandidakterion was a direct imperial foundation, and there was no papal oversight. It had two or three dozen professorial chairs. The professors functioned by teaching through a structure of disciplines organized within schools. In this, the Pandidakterion partly resembled the Library and Museion of Alexandria, which also functioned as a university-like organization. The Library had a much larger staff than the Pandidakterion, with over 80 permanent professorial chairs at its greatest extent.
If you are proposing The Pandidakterion as an example of holistic, undivided knowledge, it is the wrong example. You can study nearly every subject under the sun at The University of California, or at Oxford, or Edinburgh. But you cannot study all this knowledge in one place, and you are obliged to work your way through the disciplines before you are admitted to higher study. Pandidakterion does not mean ?holistic education.? Rather, it refers to an institution that has responsibility for all the branches of learning in one place, much as a Pantheon is a place that gathers all the gods of one tradition or religion.
The Pandidakterion produced scholars, scientists, administrator, lawyers, physicians, and bureaucrats. Most of these were specialists dedicated to one profession or another, one discipline or another, much like the graduates of the modern university. Ekphrasis is something else entirely ? the mission of the Pandidakterion was to graduate experts, not to produce ekphrasis.
Yours,
Ken Friedman
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
> On Jun 3, 2017, at 11:37 PM, Katreina Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Dear Ken,
>
> It would never seem correct if you are using the standards generated after the 15th century.
> Concepts as "practical, fine and applied arts", "domains" "universities" are maybe the ones that confuse you in finding the way to acknowledge the "unified knowledge".
>
> Techne, episteme and philosophy governed the entire era of classical Greece. If you want evidence, you can study a bit more the Parthenon and/or Greek tragedy. No one speaks about "fine and applied arts" neither about the way philosophy was recorded from the Enlightenment and on. Philosophia means to be a friend with wisdom and for the ancient Greeks wisdom was the process of contemplation.
>
> As for Byzantium there wasn't any University but a Pandidakterion which literally means holistic education. You should go through an extended research to examine how they managed to incorporate all fields of knowledge and manifest it to a single Ekphrasis.
> When i am referring to economy, I don't mean finance, although i should mention here that the ones you called "theologians" who thought that the sun stands still, were the people who funded Galileo. You should consider economy as the process of provision by which one is able to select their investment in human capital.
>
> And this is actually where one can find the restore point. Hence, it is not about the quantity of knowledge, or else we should refer to ourselves as encyclopedists. It is more about what economy we use to acknowledge and to use this knowledge.
>
> Katerina
>
>> On 02 Jun 2017, at 17:04, Ken Friedman <ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Katerna,
>>
>> This account of an era of unified knowledge does not seem correct to me.
>>
>>> On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:55 PM, Katerna Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> ?snip?
>>
>>> What seems strange to me is why, since we are discussing about cultural heritage and art - science alliance, we consider them as separate. The fragmentation in knowledge happened after the 15th century and had been established in modern era, as knowledge economy. Before that, geometry, physics, astronomy, medicine, arts, rhetoric and philosophy consisted the body of knowledge which was indivisible.
>>> Hence, if we go back, searching for this specific restore point, in where the holistic knowledge was the common process of learning, researching, creating and producing, we will find all the necessary elements for retrieving the ways that this knowledge can be activated in nowadays.
>>
>> ?snip?
>>
>> First, there have been different accounts of the divisions of knowledge domains over the centuries. There has never been a time anywhere in which the several kinds of knowledge were considered whole and indivisible. The divisions of knowledge domains that dominated classical Greece and the post-Alexandrian Hellenic world did not include the practical arts or professions in the domains of philosophy. Things changed again in the medieval university, but even there, the trivium and quadrivium did not include the fine or applied arts ? while the lower faculty of philosophy was different to the higher faculties of medicine, law and theology. Medicine itself distinguished between the medical theory taught at university and the work of barber-surgeons who actually worked on patients.
>>
>> Second, the changes that took place in the 15th century did not come about because of any shift in economic models. What happened was the scientists began to look at the world. 15th-century physics was a branch of natural philosophy. 15th-century physics accepted much of Aristotle?s often-mistaken account translated through the lens of Ptolemy. The Copernican model that arrived in the 16th century, followed by the work of Galileo, Kepler, and Newton meant a different world. This was not a ?fragmentation? of some unified knowledge that could be ?restored.? New facts made it impossible to think of the world in a fuzzy way governed by Aristotelian physics and a version of astrophysics dominated by Biblical theology. Literalist theologians argue that the sun stood still in Joshua 10. If the Biblical account is true, it cannot be true that the earth revolves around the sun. Talking about this as ?holistic? knowledge doesn?t make sense.
>>
>> Third, there is significantly more to know than there was to know in the 15th century. In the 15th century, we had fewer books than the number of volumes held in the Library of Alexandria when Callimachus organized the great library catalogue known as the Pinakes. Today, we have far more. Since the time of Gutenberg?s printing press, there have been millions of books published. While I cannot track the numbers from Shanghai, I gather that Google?s estimate of the world?s books runs to nearly 129,000,000 volumes not counting the same volume more than once. If you add journal articles and other material, we?re talking about an amount of information that makes a single knowledge domain impossible.
>>
>> Fourth, even within recognized disciplines, it is no longer possible for anyone in any field to cover more than a tiny fraction of what there is to know. When Henri Poincar? died in 1912, he was probably the last human being to know and understand the complete mathematical corpus of the time in which he lived. As for physics or even philosophy, the notion is incredible.
>>
>> If my view is pessimistic, I?d be curious to know two things.
>>
>> First, what evidence is there for an era of unified knowledge? It seems to me that a great deal of this idea is an optimistic notion based on an inadequate understanding of the world by people who were simply wrong about how much they knew, and just as wrong about how much of what they knew was incorrect.
>>
>> Second, just how one can ?restore? this era in a world where there is simply too much to know. I?m not asking how we can restore the illusion of unified knowledge. Too me, that?s like the Bible museum diorama in which you can see human beings living side by side with dinosaurs, rather like a new version of the Flintstone cartoon series. I?m asking for a credible account of how it is possible for anyone to restore an era of unified knowledge in a world where nearly no one can credibly manage to know what there is, even in their own field.
>>
>> It is one thing to argue in favor of interdisciplinary research. It is another to do so without accounting for what we do not know, and cannot know.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Ken Friedman
>>
>> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
>>
>> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>>
>> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>>
>> --
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>
>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>
>> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 12:07:25 +0200
From: "xDxD.vs.xDxD" <xdxd.vs.xdxd@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Inscribed with an Iron Tool
To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID:
<CAJ=DDho5oBPhhAGgE6nSEOzev4bZ+4h1EjBMzTSMou3B2Sg3ug@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Dear Friends,
Dear Ken,
As the conversations evolve on this list, I am puzzled by the absence of
> any serious reference to the important work done on these topics by
> historians and cultural historians.
>
I don't believe this to be true.
For example ? just one of the many ? one of the projects which I intended
to speak about before the previous turn of the direction of the discussion,
RuralHub (www.ruralhub.it), is built on knowledge and conscience about the
historical background and context of the mediterranean (and of the many
mediterraneans, as noted by many of the historians that you mention) and,
in the specifics, about the incredible bridge which was the Salerno region
in Italy, between Arabic sciences (for example medicine) and Western Europe.
For example, the Medical School of Salerno is one of the entities which
rose from this bridge. It started as an informal, networked, entity, and
did not achieve any legal status for over a century.
In the School several interesting practices took place which are relevant
for our discussion, bringing together sciences and technologies and
bringing them out in society through communication and art.
For example, the School had also a poetic approach, the "Flos
Medicina", which took the wisdom and knowledge of salerninan medicine
beyond borders. The poem had its verses tightly coupled to a rich
compendium in farmacology, of which Salerno was one of the principal actors
in Europe, with advanced knowledge about herbs and remedies.
Hospitals were also very innovative, in the fact that they not only cured
who was diseased, but also accepted the poor, or offered ambulatory service
to keep people under observation, and also offered contexts which were very
welcoming, assuming a distinct role in society in those times.
One of the most interesting things in the School is the Trotula. Trotula
refers to a set of 3 books on "women's medicine", which are also at the
center of disputes in regards to authorship and attribution. They used to
be attributed to the Trotula de Ruggiero, of Salerno, a women physician
(now we know that the story is more complex than that).
Trotula was part of the Mulieres Salernitanae, women scientists which
operated in the Medical School: they had a distinct role on the School, as
women could study medicine and practice as healer.
One of the interesting things about Trotula was that she used to hold
public lessons which were accessible to everyone, in public squares. These
not only were a novelty, but also a very distinct and intentional
innovation, as they brought people together to better enact strategies for
health, as a place for public discussion for other topics, and as a moment
of what we could now call inclusion, or intervention on divides.
As a matter of fact, this type of practice brought to the condition in
which lessons in the School became technically accessible to everyone,
regardless of confession and nationality.
This is only one of the historical sources which inform projects like
RuralHub. Documenting, as I was describing in another message, the ways in
which a transgressive, networked, relational approach has appeared multiple
times in the history of the area to being about interesting innovation. And
trying to establish and describe bridges and evolutions: from history to
present to future, using syncretic approaches with contributions from
sciences, arts, technologies, communication, anthropology...
And this is not the only way in which these types of projects take history
in consideration.
For example, they make extensive use of the concept and practice of
Microhistory. In Italy, we have maybe two of the most influential exponents
of Microhistory, in Giovanni Levi and Carlo Ginzburg.
According to Levi, in his "On Microhistory", "microhistorians have
concentrated on the contradictions of normative systems and therefore on
the fragmentation, contradictions and plurality of viewpoints which make
all systems fluid and open."
Which, if one desires to understand change and transformation in societies,
is a fundamental thing to do, especially if observed in a plurality of
ways, especially across relational networks.
The methods and practice of Microhistory become particularly meaningful
today, thanks to the possibility offered by data and ubiquitous
technologies and networks.
As we become able to capture myriads of microhistories through data, novel
opportunities for understanding history, present, perception of futures,
and the relations and tensions among all three arrive.
This is why, for example, projects like RuralHub are also major national
focuses on the scientific research of Netnography, and on the themes of how
to access, use and preserve heritage in the age of "hyperconnectivity".
I would not say that there is an absence of reference to historians at all:
multiple of these projects are very well informed by history.
> There is more to life than silicon.
>
of course.
But if you consider the Marcus' concept of multi-sited ethnography, you
would have to take in consideration that any study, today, is informed by
"silicon".
"The world system becomes [...] integral to and embedded in discontinuous,
multi-sited objects of study." (Marcus, 1995, "Ethnography in/of the World
System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography", Annual Review of
Anthropology, Vol. 24, p.97)
If I am in the middle of the Amazon forest I cannot avoid taking into
consideration how what happens in New York, or on Facebook, influences it,
to gain an reasonable understanding of the world.
So, maybe, it is much better to complete the sentence "There is more to
life than silicon, but you need silicon to understand it"
And, also, completing this thought, I would also search for another word
for "silicon": I would not run the risk of mistaking digital cultures and
their impacts on the world with "silicon".
cheers
Salvatore
>
> Yours,
>
> Ken Friedman
>
> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The
> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji
> University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL:
> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-
> design-economics-and-innovation/
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>
> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia
> http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
> ?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the
> page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
> password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on
> the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest
> Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
--
*[**MUTATION**]* *Art is Open Source *- http://www.artisopensource.net
*[**CITIES**]* *Human Ecosystems Relazioni* - http://he-r.i
<http://human-ecosystems.com/>t
*[**NEAR FUTURE DESIGN**]* *Nefula Ltd* - http://www.nefula.com
*[**RIGHTS**]* *Ubiquitous Commons *- http://www.ubiquitouscommons.org
---
Professor of Near Future and Transmedia Design at ISIA Design Florence:
http://www.isiadesign.fi.it/
?
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 15:36:19 +0200
From: roger malina <rmalina@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] Nina Czegledy and Roger Malina yasmin
moderators this week
To: yasmin_announcements <yasmin_announcements@estia.media.uoa.gr>,
YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID:
<CAPPudS+5g6xP10unPSPTZ-TYVhCac9E4GMewDBaRvNaGL024bg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Yasminers
This coming week Nina Czelgedy and I will be moderating
the YASMIN lists- remember that we only approve 2-3 posts
a day-so be patient if your post hasnt appeared yet
I am afraid our carbon foot print is not good over the coming
weeks- some of us will be at ISEA in Manizales where Felipe Londono
has kindly organised a Leonardo 50th birthday party, others will
be in Rio the week after ISEA where Rejane Spitz also has organised
a party, and then others yet will be in Bologna for the birthday party
that Pier Luigi Capucci has organised a symposium and party. Surely
at such worrying times, it is good to meet with friends and colleagues.
Also Ricardo Dal Farra has re launched the redcatsur discussion list
for art science and technology in latin america, a sister list to yasmin.
(details at http://www.ceiarteuntref.edu.ar/redcatsur ).
The yasmin discussion list is vigorous with the topic proposed
by Capucci in the meaning of mediterranean cultural heritage
in the digital age- please join in...at
http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
Roger F Malina
is in Dallas on his way to Manizales
blog: malina.diatrope.com
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 11:29:44 +0300
From: "Katerna Karoussos" <kkaroussos@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and
History
To: "'YASMIN DISCUSSIONS'" <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID: <000e01d2dd0c$b8fcffa0$2af6fee0$@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear Ken,
I congratulate you for your ambition, trying to deliver an e-learning lesson to a Greek person for Ancient Greek culture. Especially when this person has a doctorate degree in Ancient Greek and Byzantine culture.
I encourage you to come over, learn the Greek language, study the culture, and then we could discuss if I am mistaken. In any case, if you are teaching it, it is critical to do so.
However, because this discussion is not a history class, it wouldn?t be useful to continue this debate. If you want to find clues, my thesis is on Pearl database of Plymouth University.
Katerina
-----Original Message-----
From: yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr [mailto:yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
Sent: 04 June 2017 00:38
To: Yasmin Yasmin <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and History
Dear Katerina,
With respect to ancient Greece, you are mistaken. I was specifically referring to the knowledge domains as the classical Greeks understood and used them
Since we are writing in English for an international readership, I used English-language terms. I know the Greek terms. I described techne even though I used the terms ?fine and applied arts.? This was the realm of techne. Techne was a domain of knowledge that was unwritten, often tacit, and nearly never described except by masters to apprentices. Even then, techne was more often transmitted by modeling through physical example, much as a ballet master teaches dance. Navigators, smiths, artisans, sculptors, physicians and others practiced techne, and this is how they passed their knowledge on.
Some who practiced a techne were organized in special groups that resembled guilds. Some even took guild oaths vowing to keep their teaching secret within the fraternity of the guild. They agreed to teach the arts of the guild to the children of other guild members and to a few indentured apprentices, revealing these arts to no one outside the fraternity.
This was the case with the Oath of Hippocrates, the physician. Each new physician swore to honor his teacher as a second father, to share his income with his teacher as a partner, to help his teacher financially in times of need. He was to consider his teacher?s sons as his own brothers, and to teach them the art of medicine should they want to learn it with no fee and without indenture. The oath bound him to teach the medical precepts, oral instructions, and all other instruction to his own sons, the sons of his teacher, and to pupils who also took the physician?s oath ? but teach them to nobody else.
Other applied arts were organized in similar ways, some formally, some less formally. A navigator learned specific routes from a master navigator, sailing by landmarks, tides, and other indicators. If you read Mark Twain?s description of a riverboat pilot reading the water, you can see a modern rendition of the ancient navigator?s education. Peter Drucker?s 1993 book Post-Capitalist Society explains some of these issues, distinguishing the modern view from that of classical Greece.
The fine and applied arts were the opposite of those branches of philosophy that one might teach openly to all men. However, the philosophical education taught in such institutions as Plato?s Academy and Aristotle?s Lyceum were mainly available to the sons of wealthy families who could afford tuition. This elite philosophical education prepared young men for careers in public life as civic leaders, as leaders in war and peace, as rulers, and members of the government, as well as preparing those who would go on to govern and practice law.
Ancient Greek philosophy was not a matter of gaining wisdom through contemplation. These were not monks. They polished their skills through dialectic and argument more than contemplation. There are famous contemplative incidents, such as the time that Socrates stood all night in the snow, thinking. We remember this because it was unusual. It was a testimony to Socrates?s power of concentration and his detachment from bodily concerns such as cold, hunger, or the need to sleep. Most Greek philosophers lived a normal life, not the vita contemplativa resembling the life of a medieval monastic. Many were active rhetors and sophists who made a living in the market-place selling their argumentative skill, much like lawyers and management consultants today.
Philosophical education rested on rhetoric, analysis, and logic, including geometry and mathematics. Young men also engaged in sport and athletics in the context of their development, so that they would be ready to serve as warriors if the city should call.
Philosophical education had several dimensions. One was episteme ? the study of what we may know and how we may know it. The other was phronesis ? the study of wise action, how we should behave and what we should do. Such topics as rhetoric, dialectic, argumentation theory, and the branches of mathematics rounded out a full education.
Neither the Parthenon nor Tragedy provide evidence for these issues. The Parthenon and the other great physical monuments were built by specialists in the practice of a techne, a technical and artistic skill.
The great tragedians were poets, but they were citizens and gentlemen first. The tragedies had a sacred and civic dimensions. While prizes were awarded for the great works, they had a special role in classical Greek life unlike anything we know today. Only the literate and well educated had the skill required to compete writing tragic drama for the festivals ? or, to be precise, writing the three tragedies and a comic satyr play that constituted each entry.
Those who practiced a techne did not participate in the art of tragedy as the poets who wrote the plays, though craftsmen and artisans may have taken part in plays as actors or members of a chorus.
Even this was not the most important aspect of life, not for the greatest of the playwrights. Consider the life of Aeschylus, one of the two greatest, along with Sophocles. Aeschylus won the first prize more than often any playwright other than Sophocles, but he defined himself before everything else as a citizen who fought the Persians at Marathon in 490 BCE to defend democracy and he likely fought again at Salamis in 480 BCE.
For Aeschylus, pride in Athens and a sense of the common good were the heart of what it was to be a man of distinction. The words that he composed for the epitaph on his tombstone ? he probably wrote them himself ? commemorated his service as a soldier and citizen. He said nothing of his stature as the foremost poet of dramatic tragedy or the many honors he won at the festivals.
?This memorial covers Aischylos son of Euphorion ? an Athenian, though he died at wheat-bearing Gela.
Of his glorious prowess the sacred land of Marathon can tell ? and the long-haired Mede (Persian) who knows it well.?
Bernard Knox once wrote that the paper monuments of ancient Greece have stood longer and in better condition than the stones, and I have studied them more carefully than I have studied the Parthenon.
It is fair to say that I understand Greek tragedy. Or at least it is fair to say that I have read the tragedies. Only a few survive of the many that Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides wrote, though. Translations differ, from the florid 19th century translations to the excellent modern translations of Richmond Lattimore, the powerful renditions of Robert Fagles, and the contemporary versions of Ruby Blondell.
The tragedies contain very little about knowledge domains. These are quasi-sacred works, sacred in the sense that they were written for the great sacred occasions of civic life. The tragedies concern the deep qualities of human being, the acts of gods, human obligations toward the gods, human obligations toward one another, and the obligation to understand and to do what is right ? often at a high cost.
What I wrote yesterday was that the Greeks established knowledge domains, and that these domains were not unified. This is not a backward look imposing 15th century views or 21st century views on the men and women of the 5th century BCE. It is an account of their view as they saw it in their own time. The classical Greeks taught and transmitted techne and episteme in different ways to different kinds of people. These people did not generally share their knowledge with one another. A small farmer with a freehold and some olive groves might need to know more about managing the farm and instructing the work of his slaves than the sons of wealthy aristocrats would need to know for the management of far larger estates, but they learned none of this in the formal knowledge of the schools.
There have been many different ways that different societies defined knowledge and organized it. These involved very different kinds of distinctions about what knowledge was, who might practice different kinds of knowledge, how knowledge was to be maintained, preserved and transmitted. I am not imposing 15th-century ideas on earlier cultures. I am reporting what those cultures said of themselves.
And, yes, I know that Galileo worked for universities founded by Papal decree. It is nevertheless incorrect to say that theologians funded Galileo. The church had many arms, and the church often appointed priests to manage them. Since all ordained priests were required to study theology within their formative education, all were theologians in some sense. Relatively few, however, were professional theologians.
Since Galileo received patronage from high prelates at different points in his career, it is in a sense true that theologians funded his work ? but *not* in their capacity as theologians.
When Galileo's research moved beyond the bounds of acceptable doctrine, the Inquisition made a case against Galileo on theological grounds. The inquisitors are the theologians to whom I referred. The inquisitors acted as professional theologians within the scope of their assigned theological duties. These theologians were not the same people who funded Galileo?s earlier work.
Before dispensing advice on the research that I should do, I?d suggest that you catch up on your own reading. The Pandidakterion was, for all practical purposes, a university, and many historians describe it as a university. It did not have the university structure of the medieval Western universities, but it did have the same kinds of professional schools where people could study law and medicine, as well as other disciplines. Like many Western universities, the role of the Pandidakterion was to produce an educated professional bureaucracy to serve the needs of the state.
In the West, cathedral schools grew into universities with the right to deliver the Studium Generale, and Papal foundations generally meant this at the start. The Pandidakterion was a direct imperial foundation, and there was no papal oversight. It had two or three dozen professorial chairs. The professors functioned by teaching through a structure of disciplines organized within schools. In this, the Pandidakterion partly resembled the Library and Museion of Alexandria, which also functioned as a university-like organization. The Library had a much larger staff than the Pandidakterion, with over 80 permanent professorial chairs at its greatest extent.
If you are proposing The Pandidakterion as an example of holistic, undivided knowledge, it is the wrong example. You can study nearly every subject under the sun at The University of California, or at Oxford, or Edinburgh. But you cannot study all this knowledge in one place, and you are obliged to work your way through the disciplines before you are admitted to higher study. Pandidakterion does not mean ?holistic education.? Rather, it refers to an institution that has responsibility for all the branches of learning in one place, much as a Pantheon is a place that gathers all the gods of one tradition or religion.
The Pandidakterion produced scholars, scientists, administrator, lawyers, physicians, and bureaucrats. Most of these were specialists dedicated to one profession or another, one discipline or another, much like the graduates of the modern university. Ekphrasis is something else entirely ? the mission of the Pandidakterion was to graduate experts, not to produce ekphrasis.
Yours,
Ken Friedman
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
> On Jun 3, 2017, at 11:37 PM, Katreina Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Dear Ken,
>
> It would never seem correct if you are using the standards generated after the 15th century.
> Concepts as "practical, fine and applied arts", "domains" "universities" are maybe the ones that confuse you in finding the way to acknowledge the "unified knowledge".
>
> Techne, episteme and philosophy governed the entire era of classical Greece. If you want evidence, you can study a bit more the Parthenon and/or Greek tragedy. No one speaks about "fine and applied arts" neither about the way philosophy was recorded from the Enlightenment and on. Philosophia means to be a friend with wisdom and for the ancient Greeks wisdom was the process of contemplation.
>
> As for Byzantium there wasn't any University but a Pandidakterion which literally means holistic education. You should go through an extended research to examine how they managed to incorporate all fields of knowledge and manifest it to a single Ekphrasis.
> When i am referring to economy, I don't mean finance, although i should mention here that the ones you called "theologians" who thought that the sun stands still, were the people who funded Galileo. You should consider economy as the process of provision by which one is able to select their investment in human capital.
>
> And this is actually where one can find the restore point. Hence, it is not about the quantity of knowledge, or else we should refer to ourselves as encyclopedists. It is more about what economy we use to acknowledge and to use this knowledge.
>
> Katerina
>
>> On 02 Jun 2017, at 17:04, Ken Friedman <ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Katerna,
>>
>> This account of an era of unified knowledge does not seem correct to me.
>>
>>> On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:55 PM, Katerna Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> ?snip?
>>
>>> What seems strange to me is why, since we are discussing about cultural heritage and art - science alliance, we consider them as separate. The fragmentation in knowledge happened after the 15th century and had been established in modern era, as knowledge economy. Before that, geometry, physics, astronomy, medicine, arts, rhetoric and philosophy consisted the body of knowledge which was indivisible.
>>> Hence, if we go back, searching for this specific restore point, in where the holistic knowledge was the common process of learning, researching, creating and producing, we will find all the necessary elements for retrieving the ways that this knowledge can be activated in nowadays.
>>
>> ?snip?
>>
>> First, there have been different accounts of the divisions of knowledge domains over the centuries. There has never been a time anywhere in which the several kinds of knowledge were considered whole and indivisible. The divisions of knowledge domains that dominated classical Greece and the post-Alexandrian Hellenic world did not include the practical arts or professions in the domains of philosophy. Things changed again in the medieval university, but even there, the trivium and quadrivium did not include the fine or applied arts ? while the lower faculty of philosophy was different to the higher faculties of medicine, law and theology. Medicine itself distinguished between the medical theory taught at university and the work of barber-surgeons who actually worked on patients.
>>
>> Second, the changes that took place in the 15th century did not come about because of any shift in economic models. What happened was the scientists began to look at the world. 15th-century physics was a branch of natural philosophy. 15th-century physics accepted much of Aristotle?s often-mistaken account translated through the lens of Ptolemy. The Copernican model that arrived in the 16th century, followed by the work of Galileo, Kepler, and Newton meant a different world. This was not a ?fragmentation? of some unified knowledge that could be ?restored.? New facts made it impossible to think of the world in a fuzzy way governed by Aristotelian physics and a version of astrophysics dominated by Biblical theology. Literalist theologians argue that the sun stood still in Joshua 10. If the Biblical account is true, it cannot be true that the earth revolves around the sun. Talking about this as ?holistic? knowledge doesn?t make sense.
>>
>> Third, there is significantly more to know than there was to know in the 15th century. In the 15th century, we had fewer books than the number of volumes held in the Library of Alexandria when Callimachus organized the great library catalogue known as the Pinakes. Today, we have far more. Since the time of Gutenberg?s printing press, there have been millions of books published. While I cannot track the numbers from Shanghai, I gather that Google?s estimate of the world?s books runs to nearly 129,000,000 volumes not counting the same volume more than once. If you add journal articles and other material, we?re talking about an amount of information that makes a single knowledge domain impossible.
>>
>> Fourth, even within recognized disciplines, it is no longer possible for anyone in any field to cover more than a tiny fraction of what there is to know. When Henri Poincar? died in 1912, he was probably the last human being to know and understand the complete mathematical corpus of the time in which he lived. As for physics or even philosophy, the notion is incredible.
>>
>> If my view is pessimistic, I?d be curious to know two things.
>>
>> First, what evidence is there for an era of unified knowledge? It seems to me that a great deal of this idea is an optimistic notion based on an inadequate understanding of the world by people who were simply wrong about how much they knew, and just as wrong about how much of what they knew was incorrect.
>>
>> Second, just how one can ?restore? this era in a world where there is simply too much to know. I?m not asking how we can restore the illusion of unified knowledge. Too me, that?s like the Bible museum diorama in which you can see human beings living side by side with dinosaurs, rather like a new version of the Flintstone cartoon series. I?m asking for a credible account of how it is possible for anyone to restore an era of unified knowledge in a world where nearly no one can credibly manage to know what there is, even in their own field.
>>
>> It is one thing to argue in favor of interdisciplinary research. It is another to do so without accounting for what we do not know, and cannot know.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Ken Friedman
>>
>> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The
>> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji
>> University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL:
>> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economi
>> cs-and-innovation/
>>
>> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
>> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
>> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
>> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>>
>> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia
>> http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I
>> http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>>
>> --
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>
>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>
>> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
>> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 12:51:56 -0400
From: czegledy@interlog.com
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and History
To: yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
Message-ID: <a06240834d559e804afd3@[192.168.1.64]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Dear All,
Sincere apologies for my belated postings - in my next messages
I will comment on the "art*science 2017" - The New and History
discourse.
I am delighted to report that on behalf of the Leonardo
50th Committee we initiated and on behalf of the Leonardo
50th Committee, I am currently co-developing up to 14 Celebrations
in 2017 and 2018 around the world. Even more Celebrations are
organized by the Leonardo HQ.
If anybody is interested in details, or to join us, or would like to host a
Celebration please do not hesitate to contact me.
Hosts of the Leonardo 50th have been recently invited to join this
discussion. Our Leonardo 50th hosts and potential discussants:
Felipe C Londono, G. Mauricio Mej?a, Andres Burbano, ISEA2017,
Manizales, Colombia
Rejane Spitz, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Mike Phillips, Ricardo Dal Farra - Balance Unbalance 2017,
Plymouth, UK
Simon Bart, Ricardo Dal Farra Concordia U, Gisele Trudel,
Hexagram, Montreal, Canada
Adam Tindale, OCADU, Matt Ratto, University of Toronto,
Canada
Ian Clothier, Intercreate org., Taranaki, New Zealand
Miklos Peternak, Zoltan Szegedy Maszak, Hungarian University
of Fine Arts, Budapest, Hungary
Bettina Schuelke, Angewandte Innovation Lab, University of Applied
Arts, Vienna, Austria
Jadwiga Charzynska, Ryszard W. Kluszczynski, IKT Congress,
Laznia Center, Gdanks, Poland
Marcus Neustetter, ISEA2018, Durban, South Africa
Lily Diaz-Kommonen, Philip Dean, Rasmus Vuori, Aalto University,
Helsinki, Finland
In progress:
Pedro Pombo, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal
Luz Mar?a S?nchez Cardona, UAM, Mexico City, Mexico
Nisar Keshvani, University of Central Asia, Kazakhstan
Best regards
Nina Czegledy
**********************************************************
Independent Artist, Curator
Adjunct Professor, Ontario College of Art and Design University, Toronto
Senior Fellow, KMDI, University of Toronto
Research Fellow, Semaphore Research Cluster, University of Toronto
Research Collaborator Hexagram International
Network for Research Creation, Montreal
Senior Fellow, Intermedia, Hungarian University of Fine Arts,Budapest
Honorary Fellow, Moholy Nagy University of Art and Design, Budapest
Member of the Governing Board Leonardo/ISAST
Board Member AICA International Association of Art Critics Canada
Chair, Intercreate org, New Zealand
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 12:52:01 -0400
From: czegledy@interlog.com
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and History
To: yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
Message-ID: <a06240835d559ea603d95@[192.168.1.64]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Hello All,
Sincere apologies for neglecting my participation as a moderator,
nonetheless, I followed faithfully the postings and found it fascinating
how many intriguing sometimes-contradictory viewpoints enhanced
this discussion initiated by Pier Luigi Capucci in anticipation of the
Yasmin meeting at the Leonardo 50th Celebration in Bologna, the
introductory 50th Celebration in Manizales as well as all the Celebrations
to follow.
I would like to start with a request for a fresh direction concerning postings.
It would be great to receive short, provocative questions and comments
on the main topics, brief evocative thoughts from personal inter-disciplinary
experiences - again related to the discussion topics etc.,
I also would like to encourage all the silent Yasminers of all ages to
contribute as it is really important to have a broad, inter-generational,
international exchange on the vital theme proposed by Pier Luigi.
In keeping with the above request for short postings - I rest here and
address a couple points in the next messages.
All the best
Nina Czegledy
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 15:22:11 +0300
From: Elif Ayiter <ayiter@sabanciuniv.edu>
Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and
History
To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID:
<CALGEG-ghFofq=yFggUuvqfeka=sC-LCyXkh17ttxJqosYmXAVw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hello everyone,
My apologies for having stayed away from the discussion for a long time. I
have tried to catch up on the rather voluminous flow of exchanges, however
I have to admit that there doesn't seem to be much that I can contribute to
it since much of it falls out of my area of expertise.
Instead I would like to pick on something tangible that Pier has suggested
somewhere along the line, which is talking a bit about our own personal
work in the context of "Heritage and the Mediterranean Rim." So, first off
let me give you the link to my website where I collect images of the
"things" I make and where you can also find links to my texts:
http://www.elifayiter.com/
I am Turkish, living in Istanbul, where I have spent the bulk of my life,
except for a gap of 7 years in New York, and 2 others of 2 years each
during my youth in England. I am 64 years old (to also address Roger's
suggestion as to the relevance of age/generation as part of this
discourse). Almost everything I have made or have written about over the
past 10 years has revolved around 3 dimensional online virtual worlds - the
metaverse of Second Life and the OpenSim - and in the website linked above
you will find visual documentations of quite a bit of what I have made
there, especially over the past 5 years. In these worlds I work as an
architect (or rather as a storyworld builder since the building activity
goes beyond just architecture, in that creating geography, flora/fauna and
climate are an important part of what we do).
http://www.elifayiter.com/storyworlds
And then I also work as a fashion designer for avatar apparel - again, you
will see examples of what I make on this page on the site:
http://www.elifayiter.com/alphatribe
I use a lot of historic material when I make things. I have a huge
fascination with "old paper" as it were - be this antique prints, old maps,
miniatures, plans, blueprints, biological or scientific drawings, and and
and... My main interest is Western European "old paper" - especially from
the 17th century onward, but I sometimes wander off to other geographies
and cultures as well. I spend most of my time looking at these things - you
have no idea what a hangout wikimedia commons is for me - I am there pretty
much all the time, wandering from link to link... And I make usage of this
material quite consciously and deliberately by using it as architectural
texturing material (wall coverings and the like), as well as fabric
textures for avatar attire or as skin tattoos for avatars. And I have even
been known to put the stuff on some poor unsuspecting cows that are part of
a pastoral scene comprised of antique prints of the municipal parks of
Paris in the 18th century:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/alpha_auer/21631634601/in/photolist-yXvMkg-yE6Stb-yEcvCR-yWHTRt-yE7URU
Having said that my main interest is Western European "old paper,"
nevertheless my own part of the world - i.e., Eastern Europe and Asia Minor
appears to also be significant: Although I do not make a conscious effort
to do so, the visual heritage of the particular point of the Mediterranean
rim that I come from - i.e., Ottoman / Byzantine art and architecture -
seems to play a significant role in where I get my ideas and inspirations,
especially when it comes to overall building strategies. In other words, I
seem to like to "clothe" my plants, buildings and outfits with Western
European old maps, botanical prints, engravings and so forth; but when it
comes to the actual construction of things, especially architecture and
also plants, I seem to slip into my own heritage, and I am often told that
the storyworlds that I build end up looking pretty much like what one would
expect from someone living hereabouts.
I first became aware of this subliminal inspiration and how the visual
heritage of my beloved city seemed to work its way into what I built, when,
during my very early years in the metaverse, I was blogged about as a
Byzantine metaverse builder (
http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2008/06/the-byzantine-w.html). When reading this
post, although I really had not made a conscious effort in this regard, the
connection that the author made between my history and what I was building
made immediate sense to me - I embraced it. Which is not to say that from
that point onward I started to make deliberate attempts to integrate my
heritage into what I built. But, more often than not, it happens and it
happens naturally. Sometimes I become aware of it myself after the actual
building work is done or while I am still putting things together, and
sometimes visitors to my spaces point it out to me.
I don't know if such a self-presentation has been helpful to the overall
discussion. The main point I am trying to make, I guess, is that at least
for me heritage is something so ingrained, the impact of which is so
natural, so unforced that its inspirations happen regardless of whether we
seek them or not. Yes, of course, we become aware of it; and yes, we also
consciously integrate it into our work. But, still, the bottom-line, for
me, is that it is a natural thing we carry with us and it pours forth in
what we do regardless of whether we watch out for it or not.
best,
elif
On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Katerna Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Dear Ken,
>
> I congratulate you for your ambition, trying to deliver an e-learning
> lesson to a Greek person for Ancient Greek culture. Especially when this
> person has a doctorate degree in Ancient Greek and Byzantine culture.
> I encourage you to come over, learn the Greek language, study the culture,
> and then we could discuss if I am mistaken. In any case, if you are
> teaching it, it is critical to do so.
> However, because this discussion is not a history class, it wouldn?t be
> useful to continue this debate. If you want to find clues, my thesis is on
> Pearl database of Plymouth University.
>
> Katerina
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr [mailto:
> yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
> Sent: 04 June 2017 00:38
> To: Yasmin Yasmin <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and History
>
> Dear Katerina,
>
> With respect to ancient Greece, you are mistaken. I was specifically
> referring to the knowledge domains as the classical Greeks understood and
> used them
>
> Since we are writing in English for an international readership, I used
> English-language terms. I know the Greek terms. I described techne even
> though I used the terms ?fine and applied arts.? This was the realm of
> techne. Techne was a domain of knowledge that was unwritten, often tacit,
> and nearly never described except by masters to apprentices. Even then,
> techne was more often transmitted by modeling through physical example,
> much as a ballet master teaches dance. Navigators, smiths, artisans,
> sculptors, physicians and others practiced techne, and this is how they
> passed their knowledge on.
>
> Some who practiced a techne were organized in special groups that
> resembled guilds. Some even took guild oaths vowing to keep their teaching
> secret within the fraternity of the guild. They agreed to teach the arts of
> the guild to the children of other guild members and to a few indentured
> apprentices, revealing these arts to no one outside the fraternity.
>
> This was the case with the Oath of Hippocrates, the physician. Each new
> physician swore to honor his teacher as a second father, to share his
> income with his teacher as a partner, to help his teacher financially in
> times of need. He was to consider his teacher?s sons as his own brothers,
> and to teach them the art of medicine should they want to learn it with no
> fee and without indenture. The oath bound him to teach the medical
> precepts, oral instructions, and all other instruction to his own sons, the
> sons of his teacher, and to pupils who also took the physician?s oath ? but
> teach them to nobody else.
>
> Other applied arts were organized in similar ways, some formally, some
> less formally. A navigator learned specific routes from a master navigator,
> sailing by landmarks, tides, and other indicators. If you read Mark Twain?s
> description of a riverboat pilot reading the water, you can see a modern
> rendition of the ancient navigator?s education. Peter Drucker?s 1993 book
> Post-Capitalist Society explains some of these issues, distinguishing the
> modern view from that of classical Greece.
>
> The fine and applied arts were the opposite of those branches of
> philosophy that one might teach openly to all men. However, the
> philosophical education taught in such institutions as Plato?s Academy and
> Aristotle?s Lyceum were mainly available to the sons of wealthy families
> who could afford tuition. This elite philosophical education prepared young
> men for careers in public life as civic leaders, as leaders in war and
> peace, as rulers, and members of the government, as well as preparing those
> who would go on to govern and practice law.
>
> Ancient Greek philosophy was not a matter of gaining wisdom through
> contemplation. These were not monks. They polished their skills through
> dialectic and argument more than contemplation. There are famous
> contemplative incidents, such as the time that Socrates stood all night in
> the snow, thinking. We remember this because it was unusual. It was a
> testimony to Socrates?s power of concentration and his detachment from
> bodily concerns such as cold, hunger, or the need to sleep. Most Greek
> philosophers lived a normal life, not the vita contemplativa resembling the
> life of a medieval monastic. Many were active rhetors and sophists who made
> a living in the market-place selling their argumentative skill, much like
> lawyers and management consultants today.
>
> Philosophical education rested on rhetoric, analysis, and logic, including
> geometry and mathematics. Young men also engaged in sport and athletics in
> the context of their development, so that they would be ready to serve as
> warriors if the city should call.
>
> Philosophical education had several dimensions. One was episteme ? the
> study of what we may know and how we may know it. The other was phronesis ?
> the study of wise action, how we should behave and what we should do. Such
> topics as rhetoric, dialectic, argumentation theory, and the branches of
> mathematics rounded out a full education.
>
> Neither the Parthenon nor Tragedy provide evidence for these issues. The
> Parthenon and the other great physical monuments were built by specialists
> in the practice of a techne, a technical and artistic skill.
>
> The great tragedians were poets, but they were citizens and gentlemen
> first. The tragedies had a sacred and civic dimensions. While prizes were
> awarded for the great works, they had a special role in classical Greek
> life unlike anything we know today. Only the literate and well educated had
> the skill required to compete writing tragic drama for the festivals ? or,
> to be precise, writing the three tragedies and a comic satyr play that
> constituted each entry.
>
> Those who practiced a techne did not participate in the art of tragedy as
> the poets who wrote the plays, though craftsmen and artisans may have taken
> part in plays as actors or members of a chorus.
>
> Even this was not the most important aspect of life, not for the greatest
> of the playwrights. Consider the life of Aeschylus, one of the two
> greatest, along with Sophocles. Aeschylus won the first prize more than
> often any playwright other than Sophocles, but he defined himself before
> everything else as a citizen who fought the Persians at Marathon in 490 BCE
> to defend democracy and he likely fought again at Salamis in 480 BCE.
>
> For Aeschylus, pride in Athens and a sense of the common good were the
> heart of what it was to be a man of distinction. The words that he composed
> for the epitaph on his tombstone ? he probably wrote them himself ?
> commemorated his service as a soldier and citizen. He said nothing of his
> stature as the foremost poet of dramatic tragedy or the many honors he won
> at the festivals.
>
> ?This memorial covers Aischylos son of Euphorion ? an Athenian, though he
> died at wheat-bearing Gela.
> Of his glorious prowess the sacred land of Marathon can tell ? and the
> long-haired Mede (Persian) who knows it well.?
>
> Bernard Knox once wrote that the paper monuments of ancient Greece have
> stood longer and in better condition than the stones, and I have studied
> them more carefully than I have studied the Parthenon.
>
> It is fair to say that I understand Greek tragedy. Or at least it is fair
> to say that I have read the tragedies. Only a few survive of the many that
> Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides wrote, though. Translations differ,
> from the florid 19th century translations to the excellent modern
> translations of Richmond Lattimore, the powerful renditions of Robert
> Fagles, and the contemporary versions of Ruby Blondell.
>
> The tragedies contain very little about knowledge domains. These are
> quasi-sacred works, sacred in the sense that they were written for the
> great sacred occasions of civic life. The tragedies concern the deep
> qualities of human being, the acts of gods, human obligations toward the
> gods, human obligations toward one another, and the obligation to
> understand and to do what is right ? often at a high cost.
>
> What I wrote yesterday was that the Greeks established knowledge domains,
> and that these domains were not unified. This is not a backward look
> imposing 15th century views or 21st century views on the men and women of
> the 5th century BCE. It is an account of their view as they saw it in their
> own time. The classical Greeks taught and transmitted techne and episteme
> in different ways to different kinds of people. These people did not
> generally share their knowledge with one another. A small farmer with a
> freehold and some olive groves might need to know more about managing the
> farm and instructing the work of his slaves than the sons of wealthy
> aristocrats would need to know for the management of far larger estates,
> but they learned none of this in the formal knowledge of the schools.
>
> There have been many different ways that different societies defined
> knowledge and organized it. These involved very different kinds of
> distinctions about what knowledge was, who might practice different kinds
> of knowledge, how knowledge was to be maintained, preserved and
> transmitted. I am not imposing 15th-century ideas on earlier cultures. I am
> reporting what those cultures said of themselves.
>
> And, yes, I know that Galileo worked for universities founded by Papal
> decree. It is nevertheless incorrect to say that theologians funded
> Galileo. The church had many arms, and the church often appointed priests
> to manage them. Since all ordained priests were required to study theology
> within their formative education, all were theologians in some sense.
> Relatively few, however, were professional theologians.
>
> Since Galileo received patronage from high prelates at different points in
> his career, it is in a sense true that theologians funded his work ? but
> *not* in their capacity as theologians.
>
> When Galileo's research moved beyond the bounds of acceptable doctrine,
> the Inquisition made a case against Galileo on theological grounds. The
> inquisitors are the theologians to whom I referred. The inquisitors acted
> as professional theologians within the scope of their assigned theological
> duties. These theologians were not the same people who funded Galileo?s
> earlier work.
>
> Before dispensing advice on the research that I should do, I?d suggest
> that you catch up on your own reading. The Pandidakterion was, for all
> practical purposes, a university, and many historians describe it as a
> university. It did not have the university structure of the medieval
> Western universities, but it did have the same kinds of professional
> schools where people could study law and medicine, as well as other
> disciplines. Like many Western universities, the role of the Pandidakterion
> was to produce an educated professional bureaucracy to serve the needs of
> the state.
>
> In the West, cathedral schools grew into universities with the right to
> deliver the Studium Generale, and Papal foundations generally meant this at
> the start. The Pandidakterion was a direct imperial foundation, and there
> was no papal oversight. It had two or three dozen professorial chairs. The
> professors functioned by teaching through a structure of disciplines
> organized within schools. In this, the Pandidakterion partly resembled the
> Library and Museion of Alexandria, which also functioned as a
> university-like organization. The Library had a much larger staff than the
> Pandidakterion, with over 80 permanent professorial chairs at its greatest
> extent.
>
> If you are proposing The Pandidakterion as an example of holistic,
> undivided knowledge, it is the wrong example. You can study nearly every
> subject under the sun at The University of California, or at Oxford, or
> Edinburgh. But you cannot study all this knowledge in one place, and you
> are obliged to work your way through the disciplines before you are
> admitted to higher study. Pandidakterion does not mean ?holistic
> education.? Rather, it refers to an institution that has responsibility for
> all the branches of learning in one place, much as a Pantheon is a place
> that gathers all the gods of one tradition or religion.
>
> The Pandidakterion produced scholars, scientists, administrator, lawyers,
> physicians, and bureaucrats. Most of these were specialists dedicated to
> one profession or another, one discipline or another, much like the
> graduates of the modern university. Ekphrasis is something else entirely ?
> the mission of the Pandidakterion was to graduate experts, not to produce
> ekphrasis.
>
> Yours,
>
> Ken Friedman
>
> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The
> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji
> University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL:
> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-
> design-economics-and-innovation/
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>
> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia
> http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
> > On Jun 3, 2017, at 11:37 PM, Katreina Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dear Ken,
> >
> > It would never seem correct if you are using the standards generated
> after the 15th century.
> > Concepts as "practical, fine and applied arts", "domains" "universities"
> are maybe the ones that confuse you in finding the way to acknowledge the
> "unified knowledge".
> >
> > Techne, episteme and philosophy governed the entire era of classical
> Greece. If you want evidence, you can study a bit more the Parthenon and/or
> Greek tragedy. No one speaks about "fine and applied arts" neither about
> the way philosophy was recorded from the Enlightenment and on. Philosophia
> means to be a friend with wisdom and for the ancient Greeks wisdom was the
> process of contemplation.
> >
> > As for Byzantium there wasn't any University but a Pandidakterion which
> literally means holistic education. You should go through an extended
> research to examine how they managed to incorporate all fields of knowledge
> and manifest it to a single Ekphrasis.
> > When i am referring to economy, I don't mean finance, although i should
> mention here that the ones you called "theologians" who thought that the
> sun stands still, were the people who funded Galileo. You should consider
> economy as the process of provision by which one is able to select their
> investment in human capital.
> >
> > And this is actually where one can find the restore point. Hence, it is
> not about the quantity of knowledge, or else we should refer to ourselves
> as encyclopedists. It is more about what economy we use to acknowledge and
> to use this knowledge.
> >
> > Katerina
> >
> >> On 02 Jun 2017, at 17:04, Ken Friedman <ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Katerna,
> >>
> >> This account of an era of unified knowledge does not seem correct to me.
> >>
> >>> On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:55 PM, Katerna Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> ?snip?
> >>
> >>> What seems strange to me is why, since we are discussing about
> cultural heritage and art - science alliance, we consider them as separate.
> The fragmentation in knowledge happened after the 15th century and had been
> established in modern era, as knowledge economy. Before that, geometry,
> physics, astronomy, medicine, arts, rhetoric and philosophy consisted the
> body of knowledge which was indivisible.
> >>> Hence, if we go back, searching for this specific restore point, in
> where the holistic knowledge was the common process of learning,
> researching, creating and producing, we will find all the necessary
> elements for retrieving the ways that this knowledge can be activated in
> nowadays.
> >>
> >> ?snip?
> >>
> >> First, there have been different accounts of the divisions of knowledge
> domains over the centuries. There has never been a time anywhere in which
> the several kinds of knowledge were considered whole and indivisible. The
> divisions of knowledge domains that dominated classical Greece and the
> post-Alexandrian Hellenic world did not include the practical arts or
> professions in the domains of philosophy. Things changed again in the
> medieval university, but even there, the trivium and quadrivium did not
> include the fine or applied arts ? while the lower faculty of philosophy
> was different to the higher faculties of medicine, law and theology.
> Medicine itself distinguished between the medical theory taught at
> university and the work of barber-surgeons who actually worked on patients.
> >>
> >> Second, the changes that took place in the 15th century did not come
> about because of any shift in economic models. What happened was the
> scientists began to look at the world. 15th-century physics was a branch of
> natural philosophy. 15th-century physics accepted much of Aristotle?s
> often-mistaken account translated through the lens of Ptolemy. The
> Copernican model that arrived in the 16th century, followed by the work of
> Galileo, Kepler, and Newton meant a different world. This was not a
> ?fragmentation? of some unified knowledge that could be ?restored.? New
> facts made it impossible to think of the world in a fuzzy way governed by
> Aristotelian physics and a version of astrophysics dominated by Biblical
> theology. Literalist theologians argue that the sun stood still in Joshua
> 10. If the Biblical account is true, it cannot be true that the earth
> revolves around the sun. Talking about this as ?holistic? knowledge doesn?t
> make sense.
> >>
> >> Third, there is significantly more to know than there was to know in
> the 15th century. In the 15th century, we had fewer books than the number
> of volumes held in the Library of Alexandria when Callimachus organized the
> great library catalogue known as the Pinakes. Today, we have far more.
> Since the time of Gutenberg?s printing press, there have been millions of
> books published. While I cannot track the numbers from Shanghai, I gather
> that Google?s estimate of the world?s books runs to nearly 129,000,000
> volumes not counting the same volume more than once. If you add journal
> articles and other material, we?re talking about an amount of information
> that makes a single knowledge domain impossible.
> >>
> >> Fourth, even within recognized disciplines, it is no longer possible
> for anyone in any field to cover more than a tiny fraction of what there is
> to know. When Henri Poincar? died in 1912, he was probably the last human
> being to know and understand the complete mathematical corpus of the time
> in which he lived. As for physics or even philosophy, the notion is
> incredible.
> >>
> >> If my view is pessimistic, I?d be curious to know two things.
> >>
> >> First, what evidence is there for an era of unified knowledge? It seems
> to me that a great deal of this idea is an optimistic notion based on an
> inadequate understanding of the world by people who were simply wrong about
> how much they knew, and just as wrong about how much of what they knew was
> incorrect.
> >>
> >> Second, just how one can ?restore? this era in a world where there is
> simply too much to know. I?m not asking how we can restore the illusion of
> unified knowledge. Too me, that?s like the Bible museum diorama in which
> you can see human beings living side by side with dinosaurs, rather like a
> new version of the Flintstone cartoon series. I?m asking for a credible
> account of how it is possible for anyone to restore an era of unified
> knowledge in a world where nearly no one can credibly manage to know what
> there is, even in their own field.
> >>
> >> It is one thing to argue in favor of interdisciplinary research. It is
> another to do so without accounting for what we do not know, and cannot
> know.
> >>
> >> Sincerely,
> >>
> >> Ken Friedman
> >>
> >> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The
> >> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji
> >> University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL:
> >> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economi
> >> cs-and-innovation/
> >>
> >> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
> >> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
> >> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
> >> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
> >>
> >> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia
> >> http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I
> >> http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
> >>
> >> --
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> >> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> >> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
> >>
> >> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
> >>
> >> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In
> the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
> password in the fields found further down the page.
> >> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on
> the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> >> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> >> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
> >> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> > Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> > http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
> >
> > Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
> >
> > SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the
> page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
> password in the fields found further down the page.
> > HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on
> the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> > TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> > If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
> > http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the
> page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
> password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on
> the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest
> Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the
> page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
> password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on
> the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest
> Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 19:08:59 +0000 (UTC)
From: "ale_giur@yahoo.it" <ale_giur@yahoo.it>
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] R: Re: art*science 2017 - The New and
History
To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID: <1831496916.2758756.1496603339369@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Dear Yasminers,
besides any kind of digression, I invite You to consider that part of culture which is called '' Open Science'':?
since the 50's, many scientists decided to open their researches to the most wide public audience. In Europe, we have important centers of Open Science in Amsterdam and Bucarest.?
I Think it would be very useful to invite to the present topic some of those scientists Who decided to promote free scientific information, which I Believe it is one of the most important goals of free information, accelerated by the new media.?Maybe, one day, art and science could speak the same language and exchange respective achievements.?Besides, I Think that would help humanity in getting better life conditions, as, at the present time, good conditions are reserved only to rich People, like science is.?Getting science for free would be a good inheritance for our posterity. As You know, scientists never ask artists to participate to their job to improve their knowledge. On the other side, artists always need science achievements to improve their techniques and philosophy. So, let's try to kick that goal and open to Open science. Let's do that first step towards this revolutionary exchange approach. That would be a great goal for artists and art therorists: in this way, !
maybe in a future, anyone could get to know science freely and finely through fine arts.I'm just a free Thinker, As I actually stopped to collaborate with universities and tribunals. My daughter, whose name is Yasmeen, had a big motor crash a couple of years ago. So, I dedicate all My time to her, as long as she Will be better again. In the meanwhile, I keep on following My beating heart.
Cheers,?Alessia Giurdanella?
Inviato da Yahoo Mail su Android
Il sab, 3 giu, 2017 alle 19:09, Katreina Karoussos<kkaroussos@gmail.com> ha scritto:
Dear Ken,
It would never seem correct if you are using the standards generated after the 15th century.
Concepts as "practical, fine and applied arts", "domains" "universities" are maybe the ones that confuse you in finding the way to acknowledge the "unified knowledge".
Techne, episteme and philosophy governed the entire? era of classical Greece. If you want evidence, you can study a bit more the Parthenon and/or Greek tragedy. No one speaks about "fine and applied arts" neither about the way philosophy was recorded from the Enlightenment and on. Philosophia means to be a friend with wisdom and for the ancient Greeks wisdom was the process of contemplation.
As for Byzantium there wasn't any University but a Pandidakterion which literally means holistic education. You should go through an extended research to examine how they managed to incorporate all fields of knowledge and manifest it to a single Ekphrasis.
When i am referring to economy, I don't mean finance, although i should mention here that the ones you called "theologians" who thought that the sun stands still, were the people who funded Galileo. You should consider economy as the process of provision by which one is able to select their investment in human capital.
And this is actually where one can find the restore point. Hence, it is not about the quantity of knowledge, or else we should refer to ourselves as encyclopedists. It is more about what economy we use to acknowledge and to use this knowledge.
Katerina
> On 02 Jun 2017, at 17:04, Ken Friedman <ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Katerna,
>
> This account of an era of unified knowledge does not seem correct to me.
>
>> On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:55 PM, Katerna Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ?snip?
>
>> What seems strange to me is why, since we are discussing about cultural heritage and art - science alliance, we consider them as separate. The fragmentation in knowledge happened after the 15th century and had been established in modern era, as knowledge economy. Before that, geometry, physics, astronomy, medicine, arts, rhetoric and philosophy consisted the body of knowledge which was indivisible.
>> Hence, if we go back, searching for this specific restore point, in where the holistic knowledge was the common process of learning, researching, creating and producing, we will find all the necessary? elements for retrieving the ways that this knowledge can be activated in nowadays.
>
> ?snip?
>
> First, there have been different accounts of the divisions of knowledge domains over the centuries. There has never been a time anywhere in which the several kinds of knowledge were considered whole and indivisible. The divisions of knowledge domains that dominated classical Greece and the post-Alexandrian Hellenic world did not include the practical arts or professions in the domains of philosophy. Things changed again in the medieval university, but even there, the trivium and quadrivium did not include the fine or applied arts ? while the lower faculty of philosophy was different to the higher faculties of medicine, law and theology. Medicine itself distinguished between the medical theory taught at university and the work of barber-surgeons who actually worked on patients.
>
> Second, the changes that took place in the 15th century did not come about because of any shift in economic models. What happened was the scientists began to look at the world. 15th-century physics was a branch of natural philosophy. 15th-century physics accepted much of Aristotle?s often-mistaken account translated through the lens of Ptolemy. The Copernican model that arrived in the 16th century, followed by the work of Galileo, Kepler, and Newton meant a different world. This was not a ?fragmentation? of some unified knowledge that could be ?restored.? New facts made it impossible to think of the world in a fuzzy way governed by Aristotelian physics and a version of astrophysics dominated by Biblical theology. Literalist theologians argue that the sun stood still in Joshua 10. If the Biblical account is true, it cannot be true that the earth revolves around the sun. Talking about this as ?holistic? knowledge doesn?t make sense.
>
> Third, there is significantly more to know than there was to know in the 15th century. In the 15th century, we had fewer books than the number of volumes held in the Library of Alexandria when Callimachus organized the great library catalogue known as the Pinakes. Today, we have far more. Since the time of Gutenberg?s printing press, there have been millions of books published. While I cannot track the numbers from Shanghai, I gather that Google?s estimate of the world?s books runs to nearly 129,000,000 volumes not counting the same volume more than once. If you add journal articles and other material, we?re talking about an amount of information that makes a single knowledge domain impossible.
>
> Fourth, even within recognized disciplines, it is no longer possible for anyone in any field to cover more than a tiny fraction of what there is to know. When Henri Poincar? died in 1912, he was probably the last human being to know and understand the complete mathematical corpus of the time in which he lived. As for physics or even philosophy, the notion is incredible.
>
> If my view is pessimistic, I?d be curious to know two things.
>
> First, what evidence is there for an era of unified knowledge? It seems to me that a great deal of this idea is an optimistic notion based on an inadequate understanding of the world by people who were simply wrong about how much they knew, and just as wrong about how much of what they knew was incorrect.?
>
> Second, just how one can ?restore? this era in a world where there is simply too much to know. I?m not asking how we can restore the illusion of unified knowledge. Too me, that?s like the Bible museum diorama in which you can see human beings living side by side with dinosaurs, rather like a new version of the Flintstone cartoon series. I?m asking for a credible account of how it is possible for anyone to restore an era of unified knowledge in a world where nearly no one can credibly manage to know what there is, even in their own field.
>
> It is one thing to argue in favor of interdisciplinary research. It is another to do so without accounting for what we do not know, and cannot know.
>
> Sincerely,?
>
> Ken Friedman
>
> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>
> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 06:38:28 -0400
From: czegledy@interlog.com
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and History
To: yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
Message-ID: <a06240836d559f2be337f@[192.168.1.64]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Hello All,
A few comments based on my collaborative working experience.
On history and cultural heritage: Ziva Lubec pointed out in an
earlier post: 'Both tangible and intangible heritage has been ?
processed in different ways for different political and economic
motives and no mode of preservation and presentation of the heritage
can be taken for granted'.
I fully agree with her concern about the preservation of cultural history
in the age of shrinking support for humanistic academic studies -
although if we consider Roberta Buiani's view of cultural
heritage 'as something dynamic, constantly changing, crisscrossed
by all sorts of odd, subtle and definitely oppressive relations of power,
and definitely multi-layered' - hope remains for 'History and cultural
heritage to become key elements from cultural, historical, social as
well as economic viewpoints?' (Pier Luigi Capucci) - do you agree?
How do we proceed from historical heritage to the now and the next?
I trust education. On one hand "Stem to Steam" is gaining momentum,
moreover dual degree programs are on the rise. Beyond traditional
formal education personally I am a believer in exploring the concepts and
practice of holistic traditional knowledge transfer as investigated by
scientists (D Bohm, J Benito-Bilbao, Czegledy&Reimann) and practiced
for centuries in a variety of forms by indigenous
people around the world
(http://www.scidev.net/global/indigenous/opinion/modern-science-needs-traditional-knowledge-1.html,
http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_c/mod11.html)
Nina Czegledy
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 07:38:56 +0200
From: Kathelin Gray <kathelin@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and
History
To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID: <8200C1C9-DC53-4BF3-A7E7-05917350ABCF@yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Dear Katerina,
I have been following this thread with great interest; usually it?s difficult
for me to find time to really do justice to amazing Yasmin postings,
but this has caught my interest. As our institute was partly inspired by
the multidisciplinary aspects of the Ancient Greeks, I would love to
read your thesis. Our most public project was Biosphere 2 in Arizona,
in which we also incorporated elements of practice you describe.
We have a theatrical arm, and spent years performing Aeschylus
etc, as well as contemporary pieces.
How do I do get a copy of your thesis? Not sure how to access the
Plymouth database.
my email is kgray@ecotechnics.edu.
All bests to all, Kathelin Gray
www.ecotechnics.edu
www.rvheraclitus.org
On Jun 4, 2017, at 10:29, Katerna Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Ken,
>
> I congratulate you for your ambition, trying to deliver an e-learning lesson to a Greek person for Ancient Greek culture. Especially when this person has a doctorate degree in Ancient Greek and Byzantine culture.
> I encourage you to come over, learn the Greek language, study the culture, and then we could discuss if I am mistaken. In any case, if you are teaching it, it is critical to do so.
> However, because this discussion is not a history class, it wouldn?t be useful to continue this debate. If you want to find clues, my thesis is on Pearl database of Plymouth University.
>
> Katerina
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr [mailto:yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
> Sent: 04 June 2017 00:38
> To: Yasmin Yasmin <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and History
>
> Dear Katerina,
>
> With respect to ancient Greece, you are mistaken. I was specifically referring to the knowledge domains as the classical Greeks understood and used them
>
> Since we are writing in English for an international readership, I used English-language terms. I know the Greek terms. I described techne even though I used the terms ?fine and applied arts.? This was the realm of techne. Techne was a domain of knowledge that was unwritten, often tacit, and nearly never described except by masters to apprentices. Even then, techne was more often transmitted by modeling through physical example, much as a ballet master teaches dance. Navigators, smiths, artisans, sculptors, physicians and others practiced techne, and this is how they passed their knowledge on.
>
> Some who practiced a techne were organized in special groups that resembled guilds. Some even took guild oaths vowing to keep their teaching secret within the fraternity of the guild. They agreed to teach the arts of the guild to the children of other guild members and to a few indentured apprentices, revealing these arts to no one outside the fraternity.
>
> This was the case with the Oath of Hippocrates, the physician. Each new physician swore to honor his teacher as a second father, to share his income with his teacher as a partner, to help his teacher financially in times of need. He was to consider his teacher?s sons as his own brothers, and to teach them the art of medicine should they want to learn it with no fee and without indenture. The oath bound him to teach the medical precepts, oral instructions, and all other instruction to his own sons, the sons of his teacher, and to pupils who also took the physician?s oath ? but teach them to nobody else.
>
> Other applied arts were organized in similar ways, some formally, some less formally. A navigator learned specific routes from a master navigator, sailing by landmarks, tides, and other indicators. If you read Mark Twain?s description of a riverboat pilot reading the water, you can see a modern rendition of the ancient navigator?s education. Peter Drucker?s 1993 book Post-Capitalist Society explains some of these issues, distinguishing the modern view from that of classical Greece.
>
> The fine and applied arts were the opposite of those branches of philosophy that one might teach openly to all men. However, the philosophical education taught in such institutions as Plato?s Academy and Aristotle?s Lyceum were mainly available to the sons of wealthy families who could afford tuition. This elite philosophical education prepared young men for careers in public life as civic leaders, as leaders in war and peace, as rulers, and members of the government, as well as preparing those who would go on to govern and practice law.
>
> Ancient Greek philosophy was not a matter of gaining wisdom through contemplation. These were not monks. They polished their skills through dialectic and argument more than contemplation. There are famous contemplative incidents, such as the time that Socrates stood all night in the snow, thinking. We remember this because it was unusual. It was a testimony to Socrates?s power of concentration and his detachment from bodily concerns such as cold, hunger, or the need to sleep. Most Greek philosophers lived a normal life, not the vita contemplativa resembling the life of a medieval monastic. Many were active rhetors and sophists who made a living in the market-place selling their argumentative skill, much like lawyers and management consultants today.
>
> Philosophical education rested on rhetoric, analysis, and logic, including geometry and mathematics. Young men also engaged in sport and athletics in the context of their development, so that they would be ready to serve as warriors if the city should call.
>
> Philosophical education had several dimensions. One was episteme ? the study of what we may know and how we may know it. The other was phronesis ? the study of wise action, how we should behave and what we should do. Such topics as rhetoric, dialectic, argumentation theory, and the branches of mathematics rounded out a full education.
>
> Neither the Parthenon nor Tragedy provide evidence for these issues. The Parthenon and the other great physical monuments were built by specialists in the practice of a techne, a technical and artistic skill.
>
> The great tragedians were poets, but they were citizens and gentlemen first. The tragedies had a sacred and civic dimensions. While prizes were awarded for the great works, they had a special role in classical Greek life unlike anything we know today. Only the literate and well educated had the skill required to compete writing tragic drama for the festivals ? or, to be precise, writing the three tragedies and a comic satyr play that constituted each entry.
>
> Those who practiced a techne did not participate in the art of tragedy as the poets who wrote the plays, though craftsmen and artisans may have taken part in plays as actors or members of a chorus.
>
> Even this was not the most important aspect of life, not for the greatest of the playwrights. Consider the life of Aeschylus, one of the two greatest, along with Sophocles. Aeschylus won the first prize more than often any playwright other than Sophocles, but he defined himself before everything else as a citizen who fought the Persians at Marathon in 490 BCE to defend democracy and he likely fought again at Salamis in 480 BCE.
>
> For Aeschylus, pride in Athens and a sense of the common good were the heart of what it was to be a man of distinction. The words that he composed for the epitaph on his tombstone ? he probably wrote them himself ? commemorated his service as a soldier and citizen. He said nothing of his stature as the foremost poet of dramatic tragedy or the many honors he won at the festivals.
>
> ?This memorial covers Aischylos son of Euphorion ? an Athenian, though he died at wheat-bearing Gela.
> Of his glorious prowess the sacred land of Marathon can tell ? and the long-haired Mede (Persian) who knows it well.?
>
> Bernard Knox once wrote that the paper monuments of ancient Greece have stood longer and in better condition than the stones, and I have studied them more carefully than I have studied the Parthenon.
>
> It is fair to say that I understand Greek tragedy. Or at least it is fair to say that I have read the tragedies. Only a few survive of the many that Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides wrote, though. Translations differ, from the florid 19th century translations to the excellent modern translations of Richmond Lattimore, the powerful renditions of Robert Fagles, and the contemporary versions of Ruby Blondell.
>
> The tragedies contain very little about knowledge domains. These are quasi-sacred works, sacred in the sense that they were written for the great sacred occasions of civic life. The tragedies concern the deep qualities of human being, the acts of gods, human obligations toward the gods, human obligations toward one another, and the obligation to understand and to do what is right ? often at a high cost.
>
> What I wrote yesterday was that the Greeks established knowledge domains, and that these domains were not unified. This is not a backward look imposing 15th century views or 21st century views on the men and women of the 5th century BCE. It is an account of their view as they saw it in their own time. The classical Greeks taught and transmitted techne and episteme in different ways to different kinds of people. These people did not generally share their knowledge with one another. A small farmer with a freehold and some olive groves might need to know more about managing the farm and instructing the work of his slaves than the sons of wealthy aristocrats would need to know for the management of far larger estates, but they learned none of this in the formal knowledge of the schools.
>
> There have been many different ways that different societies defined knowledge and organized it. These involved very different kinds of distinctions about what knowledge was, who might practice different kinds of knowledge, how knowledge was to be maintained, preserved and transmitted. I am not imposing 15th-century ideas on earlier cultures. I am reporting what those cultures said of themselves.
>
> And, yes, I know that Galileo worked for universities founded by Papal decree. It is nevertheless incorrect to say that theologians funded Galileo. The church had many arms, and the church often appointed priests to manage them. Since all ordained priests were required to study theology within their formative education, all were theologians in some sense. Relatively few, however, were professional theologians.
>
> Since Galileo received patronage from high prelates at different points in his career, it is in a sense true that theologians funded his work ? but *not* in their capacity as theologians.
>
> When Galileo's research moved beyond the bounds of acceptable doctrine, the Inquisition made a case against Galileo on theological grounds. The inquisitors are the theologians to whom I referred. The inquisitors acted as professional theologians within the scope of their assigned theological duties. These theologians were not the same people who funded Galileo?s earlier work.
>
> Before dispensing advice on the research that I should do, I?d suggest that you catch up on your own reading. The Pandidakterion was, for all practical purposes, a university, and many historians describe it as a university. It did not have the university structure of the medieval Western universities, but it did have the same kinds of professional schools where people could study law and medicine, as well as other disciplines. Like many Western universities, the role of the Pandidakterion was to produce an educated professional bureaucracy to serve the needs of the state.
>
> In the West, cathedral schools grew into universities with the right to deliver the Studium Generale, and Papal foundations generally meant this at the start. The Pandidakterion was a direct imperial foundation, and there was no papal oversight. It had two or three dozen professorial chairs. The professors functioned by teaching through a structure of disciplines organized within schools. In this, the Pandidakterion partly resembled the Library and Museion of Alexandria, which also functioned as a university-like organization. The Library had a much larger staff than the Pandidakterion, with over 80 permanent professorial chairs at its greatest extent.
>
> If you are proposing The Pandidakterion as an example of holistic, undivided knowledge, it is the wrong example. You can study nearly every subject under the sun at The University of California, or at Oxford, or Edinburgh. But you cannot study all this knowledge in one place, and you are obliged to work your way through the disciplines before you are admitted to higher study. Pandidakterion does not mean ?holistic education.? Rather, it refers to an institution that has responsibility for all the branches of learning in one place, much as a Pantheon is a place that gathers all the gods of one tradition or religion.
>
> The Pandidakterion produced scholars, scientists, administrator, lawyers, physicians, and bureaucrats. Most of these were specialists dedicated to one profession or another, one discipline or another, much like the graduates of the modern university. Ekphrasis is something else entirely ? the mission of the Pandidakterion was to graduate experts, not to produce ekphrasis.
>
> Yours,
>
> Ken Friedman
>
> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>
> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 11:37 PM, Katreina Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dear Ken,
>>
>> It would never seem correct if you are using the standards generated after the 15th century.
>> Concepts as "practical, fine and applied arts", "domains" "universities" are maybe the ones that confuse you in finding the way to acknowledge the "unified knowledge".
>>
>> Techne, episteme and philosophy governed the entire era of classical Greece. If you want evidence, you can study a bit more the Parthenon and/or Greek tragedy. No one speaks about "fine and applied arts" neither about the way philosophy was recorded from the Enlightenment and on. Philosophia means to be a friend with wisdom and for the ancient Greeks wisdom was the process of contemplation.
>>
>> As for Byzantium there wasn't any University but a Pandidakterion which literally means holistic education. You should go through an extended research to examine how they managed to incorporate all fields of knowledge and manifest it to a single Ekphrasis.
>> When i am referring to economy, I don't mean finance, although i should mention here that the ones you called "theologians" who thought that the sun stands still, were the people who funded Galileo. You should consider economy as the process of provision by which one is able to select their investment in human capital.
>>
>> And this is actually where one can find the restore point. Hence, it is not about the quantity of knowledge, or else we should refer to ourselves as encyclopedists. It is more about what economy we use to acknowledge and to use this knowledge.
>>
>> Katerina
>>
>>> On 02 Jun 2017, at 17:04, Ken Friedman <ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Katerna,
>>>
>>> This account of an era of unified knowledge does not seem correct to me.
>>>
>>>> On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:55 PM, Katerna Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> ?snip?
>>>
>>>> What seems strange to me is why, since we are discussing about cultural heritage and art - science alliance, we consider them as separate. The fragmentation in knowledge happened after the 15th century and had been established in modern era, as knowledge economy. Before that, geometry, physics, astronomy, medicine, arts, rhetoric and philosophy consisted the body of knowledge which was indivisible.
>>>> Hence, if we go back, searching for this specific restore point, in where the holistic knowledge was the common process of learning, researching, creating and producing, we will find all the necessary elements for retrieving the ways that this knowledge can be activated in nowadays.
>>>
>>> ?snip?
>>>
>>> First, there have been different accounts of the divisions of knowledge domains over the centuries. There has never been a time anywhere in which the several kinds of knowledge were considered whole and indivisible. The divisions of knowledge domains that dominated classical Greece and the post-Alexandrian Hellenic world did not include the practical arts or professions in the domains of philosophy. Things changed again in the medieval university, but even there, the trivium and quadrivium did not include the fine or applied arts ? while the lower faculty of philosophy was different to the higher faculties of medicine, law and theology. Medicine itself distinguished between the medical theory taught at university and the work of barber-surgeons who actually worked on patients.
>>>
>>> Second, the changes that took place in the 15th century did not come about because of any shift in economic models. What happened was the scientists began to look at the world. 15th-century physics was a branch of natural philosophy. 15th-century physics accepted much of Aristotle?s often-mistaken account translated through the lens of Ptolemy. The Copernican model that arrived in the 16th century, followed by the work of Galileo, Kepler, and Newton meant a different world. This was not a ?fragmentation? of some unified knowledge that could be ?restored.? New facts made it impossible to think of the world in a fuzzy way governed by Aristotelian physics and a version of astrophysics dominated by Biblical theology. Literalist theologians argue that the sun stood still in Joshua 10. If the Biblical account is true, it cannot be true that the earth revolves around the sun. Talking about this as ?holistic? knowledge doesn?t make sense.
>>>
>>> Third, there is significantly more to know than there was to know in the 15th century. In the 15th century, we had fewer books than the number of volumes held in the Library of Alexandria when Callimachus organized the great library catalogue known as the Pinakes. Today, we have far more. Since the time of Gutenberg?s printing press, there have been millions of books published. While I cannot track the numbers from Shanghai, I gather that Google?s estimate of the world?s books runs to nearly 129,000,000 volumes not counting the same volume more than once. If you add journal articles and other material, we?re talking about an amount of information that makes a single knowledge domain impossible.
>>>
>>> Fourth, even within recognized disciplines, it is no longer possible for anyone in any field to cover more than a tiny fraction of what there is to know. When Henri Poincar? died in 1912, he was probably the last human being to know and understand the complete mathematical corpus of the time in which he lived. As for physics or even philosophy, the notion is incredible.
>>>
>>> If my view is pessimistic, I?d be curious to know two things.
>>>
>>> First, what evidence is there for an era of unified knowledge? It seems to me that a great deal of this idea is an optimistic notion based on an inadequate understanding of the world by people who were simply wrong about how much they knew, and just as wrong about how much of what they knew was incorrect.
>>>
>>> Second, just how one can ?restore? this era in a world where there is simply too much to know. I?m not asking how we can restore the illusion of unified knowledge. Too me, that?s like the Bible museum diorama in which you can see human beings living side by side with dinosaurs, rather like a new version of the Flintstone cartoon series. I?m asking for a credible account of how it is possible for anyone to restore an era of unified knowledge in a world where nearly no one can credibly manage to know what there is, even in their own field.
>>>
>>> It is one thing to argue in favor of interdisciplinary research. It is another to do so without accounting for what we do not know, and cannot know.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Ken Friedman
>>>
>>> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The
>>> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji
>>> University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL:
>>> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economi
>>> cs-and-innovation/
>>>
>>> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
>>> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
>>> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
>>> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>>>
>>> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia
>>> http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I
>>> http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>>>
>>> --
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>>
>>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>>
>>> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
>>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>>> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>>> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
>>> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>
>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>
>> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
>> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 13:17:13 -0500
From: roger malina <rmalina@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] yasmin discussion and dialogue
netiquette
To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID:
<CAPPudS+QNMd6mnO=_aY-ZhJMFdKpdO4+JJhp0EDvFFi9h_C34w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
yasminers
our discussion seems to be gathering steam !
some netiquette suggestions to enable better dialogue
a) keep your posts short- eg 350 words or a couple of cell phone screens
b ) try to have each post address one topic or point not several
c) avoid ad hominem statements ! its very difficult to " argue' on line=
david bohm did some great work with his writing 'on dialogue"-
Roger F Malina
is in Dallas 1-5108532007
blog: malina.diatrope.com
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 18:01:33 +0300
From: roberta buiani <rbuiani@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and
History
To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
Message-ID: <45C0B0F6-2384-47B3-A8A4-0BC53F4E8A76@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Hi all,
I find it really interesting that I am participating in this discussion while I am movung myself across a -small part- of the mediterranean (ionian islands, to Athens, to south and north of Italy). That's a fortunate coincidence, first because this gives me the opportunity to reflect more thoroughly on the ongoing discussion. But also because this is my first time I finally take more than a couple of days experiencing a world that I left 15 years ago and I am appreciating with different, but still familiar eyes.
Two items that struck as I read your comments is the importance of history and the significance of personal experience and familiarity with the tropes and patterns in understanding and working with heritage. In contemplating history, we get to know official narratives and politics shaping cultural heritage, infrastructures and the architecture of a place. But history only shows a conventional picture of this heritage. While I am interested in archival material, historical documents etc..., I am even more interested in alternative narratives and personal experiences. These are more tricky to find: you certainly don't find them in official textbooks, often they are only found as oral stories. But to assume that only written history (which is usually written from the perspective of the privileged bookish scholar) is worthy of consideration is a bit limited. I find that looking at these conventional written narratives is useful when they are accompanied by direct observation!
: for instance, monuments and architecture, just to make the obvious reference, are marked by the environment, by graffiti (I was just observing the diversity that characterizes the graffiti flourish in Athens)the chaotic overlapping of styles (Venetian architecture in Corfu, or the cacophony of styles in certain part of Rome); and signs of devotion, or joy, or power can be detected in the ways in which even when in ruin, even when just a bunch of stones, certain sites project a surprising harmony between nature and culture.
It is this type of conventional/non-conventional material that really gets me excited in my work, because its shows tensions and elicit comments from city dwellers and passers-by.
And speaking of new and old, I sometimes imagine very vivid scenes of what certain places could have looked once upon a time. A sort of mental movie.
just to respond to the request of relating our discussion to our own artistic/scholarly experience here are links to my two projects that have dealt (and still do, they are in progress) with cultural heritage in the city and in the sciences.
Transitions in Progress http://www.space-for-place.ca/
The Cabinet Project http://artscisalon.com/the-cabinet-project/
> On Jun 5, 2017, at 15:22, Elif Ayiter <ayiter@sabanciuniv.edu> wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
> My apologies for having stayed away from the discussion for a long time. I
> have tried to catch up on the rather voluminous flow of exchanges, however
> I have to admit that there doesn't seem to be much that I can contribute to
> it since much of it falls out of my area of expertise.
>
> Instead I would like to pick on something tangible that Pier has suggested
> somewhere along the line, which is talking a bit about our own personal
> work in the context of "Heritage and the Mediterranean Rim." So, first off
> let me give you the link to my website where I collect images of the
> "things" I make and where you can also find links to my texts:
>
> http://www.elifayiter.com/
>
> I am Turkish, living in Istanbul, where I have spent the bulk of my life,
> except for a gap of 7 years in New York, and 2 others of 2 years each
> during my youth in England. I am 64 years old (to also address Roger's
> suggestion as to the relevance of age/generation as part of this
> discourse). Almost everything I have made or have written about over the
> past 10 years has revolved around 3 dimensional online virtual worlds - the
> metaverse of Second Life and the OpenSim - and in the website linked above
> you will find visual documentations of quite a bit of what I have made
> there, especially over the past 5 years. In these worlds I work as an
> architect (or rather as a storyworld builder since the building activity
> goes beyond just architecture, in that creating geography, flora/fauna and
> climate are an important part of what we do).
>
> http://www.elifayiter.com/storyworlds
>
> And then I also work as a fashion designer for avatar apparel - again, you
> will see examples of what I make on this page on the site:
>
> http://www.elifayiter.com/alphatribe
>
> I use a lot of historic material when I make things. I have a huge
> fascination with "old paper" as it were - be this antique prints, old maps,
> miniatures, plans, blueprints, biological or scientific drawings, and and
> and... My main interest is Western European "old paper" - especially from
> the 17th century onward, but I sometimes wander off to other geographies
> and cultures as well. I spend most of my time looking at these things - you
> have no idea what a hangout wikimedia commons is for me - I am there pretty
> much all the time, wandering from link to link... And I make usage of this
> material quite consciously and deliberately by using it as architectural
> texturing material (wall coverings and the like), as well as fabric
> textures for avatar attire or as skin tattoos for avatars. And I have even
> been known to put the stuff on some poor unsuspecting cows that are part of
> a pastoral scene comprised of antique prints of the municipal parks of
> Paris in the 18th century:
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/alpha_auer/21631634601/in/photolist-yXvMkg-yE6Stb-yEcvCR-yWHTRt-yE7URU
>
>
> Having said that my main interest is Western European "old paper,"
> nevertheless my own part of the world - i.e., Eastern Europe and Asia Minor
> appears to also be significant: Although I do not make a conscious effort
> to do so, the visual heritage of the particular point of the Mediterranean
> rim that I come from - i.e., Ottoman / Byzantine art and architecture -
> seems to play a significant role in where I get my ideas and inspirations,
> especially when it comes to overall building strategies. In other words, I
> seem to like to "clothe" my plants, buildings and outfits with Western
> European old maps, botanical prints, engravings and so forth; but when it
> comes to the actual construction of things, especially architecture and
> also plants, I seem to slip into my own heritage, and I am often told that
> the storyworlds that I build end up looking pretty much like what one would
> expect from someone living hereabouts.
>
> I first became aware of this subliminal inspiration and how the visual
> heritage of my beloved city seemed to work its way into what I built, when,
> during my very early years in the metaverse, I was blogged about as a
> Byzantine metaverse builder (
> http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2008/06/the-byzantine-w.html). When reading this
> post, although I really had not made a conscious effort in this regard, the
> connection that the author made between my history and what I was building
> made immediate sense to me - I embraced it. Which is not to say that from
> that point onward I started to make deliberate attempts to integrate my
> heritage into what I built. But, more often than not, it happens and it
> happens naturally. Sometimes I become aware of it myself after the actual
> building work is done or while I am still putting things together, and
> sometimes visitors to my spaces point it out to me.
>
> I don't know if such a self-presentation has been helpful to the overall
> discussion. The main point I am trying to make, I guess, is that at least
> for me heritage is something so ingrained, the impact of which is so
> natural, so unforced that its inspirations happen regardless of whether we
> seek them or not. Yes, of course, we become aware of it; and yes, we also
> consciously integrate it into our work. But, still, the bottom-line, for
> me, is that it is a natural thing we carry with us and it pours forth in
> what we do regardless of whether we watch out for it or not.
>
> best,
>
> elif
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Katerna Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Dear Ken,
>>
>> I congratulate you for your ambition, trying to deliver an e-learning
>> lesson to a Greek person for Ancient Greek culture. Especially when this
>> person has a doctorate degree in Ancient Greek and Byzantine culture.
>> I encourage you to come over, learn the Greek language, study the culture,
>> and then we could discuss if I am mistaken. In any case, if you are
>> teaching it, it is critical to do so.
>> However, because this discussion is not a history class, it wouldn?t be
>> useful to continue this debate. If you want to find clues, my thesis is on
>> Pearl database of Plymouth University.
>>
>> Katerina
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr [mailto:
>> yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
>> Sent: 04 June 2017 00:38
>> To: Yasmin Yasmin <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
>> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] art*science 2017 - The New and History
>>
>> Dear Katerina,
>>
>> With respect to ancient Greece, you are mistaken. I was specifically
>> referring to the knowledge domains as the classical Greeks understood and
>> used them
>>
>> Since we are writing in English for an international readership, I used
>> English-language terms. I know the Greek terms. I described techne even
>> though I used the terms ?fine and applied arts.? This was the realm of
>> techne. Techne was a domain of knowledge that was unwritten, often tacit,
>> and nearly never described except by masters to apprentices. Even then,
>> techne was more often transmitted by modeling through physical example,
>> much as a ballet master teaches dance. Navigators, smiths, artisans,
>> sculptors, physicians and others practiced techne, and this is how they
>> passed their knowledge on.
>>
>> Some who practiced a techne were organized in special groups that
>> resembled guilds. Some even took guild oaths vowing to keep their teaching
>> secret within the fraternity of the guild. They agreed to teach the arts of
>> the guild to the children of other guild members and to a few indentured
>> apprentices, revealing these arts to no one outside the fraternity.
>>
>> This was the case with the Oath of Hippocrates, the physician. Each new
>> physician swore to honor his teacher as a second father, to share his
>> income with his teacher as a partner, to help his teacher financially in
>> times of need. He was to consider his teacher?s sons as his own brothers,
>> and to teach them the art of medicine should they want to learn it with no
>> fee and without indenture. The oath bound him to teach the medical
>> precepts, oral instructions, and all other instruction to his own sons, the
>> sons of his teacher, and to pupils who also took the physician?s oath ? but
>> teach them to nobody else.
>>
>> Other applied arts were organized in similar ways, some formally, some
>> less formally. A navigator learned specific routes from a master navigator,
>> sailing by landmarks, tides, and other indicators. If you read Mark Twain?s
>> description of a riverboat pilot reading the water, you can see a modern
>> rendition of the ancient navigator?s education. Peter Drucker?s 1993 book
>> Post-Capitalist Society explains some of these issues, distinguishing the
>> modern view from that of classical Greece.
>>
>> The fine and applied arts were the opposite of those branches of
>> philosophy that one might teach openly to all men. However, the
>> philosophical education taught in such institutions as Plato?s Academy and
>> Aristotle?s Lyceum were mainly available to the sons of wealthy families
>> who could afford tuition. This elite philosophical education prepared young
>> men for careers in public life as civic leaders, as leaders in war and
>> peace, as rulers, and members of the government, as well as preparing those
>> who would go on to govern and practice law.
>>
>> Ancient Greek philosophy was not a matter of gaining wisdom through
>> contemplation. These were not monks. They polished their skills through
>> dialectic and argument more than contemplation. There are famous
>> contemplative incidents, such as the time that Socrates stood all night in
>> the snow, thinking. We remember this because it was unusual. It was a
>> testimony to Socrates?s power of concentration and his detachment from
>> bodily concerns such as cold, hunger, or the need to sleep. Most Greek
>> philosophers lived a normal life, not the vita contemplativa resembling the
>> life of a medieval monastic. Many were active rhetors and sophists who made
>> a living in the market-place selling their argumentative skill, much like
>> lawyers and management consultants today.
>>
>> Philosophical education rested on rhetoric, analysis, and logic, including
>> geometry and mathematics. Young men also engaged in sport and athletics in
>> the context of their development, so that they would be ready to serve as
>> warriors if the city should call.
>>
>> Philosophical education had several dimensions. One was episteme ? the
>> study of what we may know and how we may know it. The other was phronesis ?
>> the study of wise action, how we should behave and what we should do. Such
>> topics as rhetoric, dialectic, argumentation theory, and the branches of
>> mathematics rounded out a full education.
>>
>> Neither the Parthenon nor Tragedy provide evidence for these issues. The
>> Parthenon and the other great physical monuments were built by specialists
>> in the practice of a techne, a technical and artistic skill.
>>
>> The great tragedians were poets, but they were citizens and gentlemen
>> first. The tragedies had a sacred and civic dimensions. While prizes were
>> awarded for the great works, they had a special role in classical Greek
>> life unlike anything we know today. Only the literate and well educated had
>> the skill required to compete writing tragic drama for the festivals ? or,
>> to be precise, writing the three tragedies and a comic satyr play that
>> constituted each entry.
>>
>> Those who practiced a techne did not participate in the art of tragedy as
>> the poets who wrote the plays, though craftsmen and artisans may have taken
>> part in plays as actors or members of a chorus.
>>
>> Even this was not the most important aspect of life, not for the greatest
>> of the playwrights. Consider the life of Aeschylus, one of the two
>> greatest, along with Sophocles. Aeschylus won the first prize more than
>> often any playwright other than Sophocles, but he defined himself before
>> everything else as a citizen who fought the Persians at Marathon in 490 BCE
>> to defend democracy and he likely fought again at Salamis in 480 BCE.
>>
>> For Aeschylus, pride in Athens and a sense of the common good were the
>> heart of what it was to be a man of distinction. The words that he composed
>> for the epitaph on his tombstone ? he probably wrote them himself ?
>> commemorated his service as a soldier and citizen. He said nothing of his
>> stature as the foremost poet of dramatic tragedy or the many honors he won
>> at the festivals.
>>
>> ?This memorial covers Aischylos son of Euphorion ? an Athenian, though he
>> died at wheat-bearing Gela.
>> Of his glorious prowess the sacred land of Marathon can tell ? and the
>> long-haired Mede (Persian) who knows it well.?
>>
>> Bernard Knox once wrote that the paper monuments of ancient Greece have
>> stood longer and in better condition than the stones, and I have studied
>> them more carefully than I have studied the Parthenon.
>>
>> It is fair to say that I understand Greek tragedy. Or at least it is fair
>> to say that I have read the tragedies. Only a few survive of the many that
>> Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides wrote, though. Translations differ,
>> from the florid 19th century translations to the excellent modern
>> translations of Richmond Lattimore, the powerful renditions of Robert
>> Fagles, and the contemporary versions of Ruby Blondell.
>>
>> The tragedies contain very little about knowledge domains. These are
>> quasi-sacred works, sacred in the sense that they were written for the
>> great sacred occasions of civic life. The tragedies concern the deep
>> qualities of human being, the acts of gods, human obligations toward the
>> gods, human obligations toward one another, and the obligation to
>> understand and to do what is right ? often at a high cost.
>>
>> What I wrote yesterday was that the Greeks established knowledge domains,
>> and that these domains were not unified. This is not a backward look
>> imposing 15th century views or 21st century views on the men and women of
>> the 5th century BCE. It is an account of their view as they saw it in their
>> own time. The classical Greeks taught and transmitted techne and episteme
>> in different ways to different kinds of people. These people did not
>> generally share their knowledge with one another. A small farmer with a
>> freehold and some olive groves might need to know more about managing the
>> farm and instructing the work of his slaves than the sons of wealthy
>> aristocrats would need to know for the management of far larger estates,
>> but they learned none of this in the formal knowledge of the schools.
>>
>> There have been many different ways that different societies defined
>> knowledge and organized it. These involved very different kinds of
>> distinctions about what knowledge was, who might practice different kinds
>> of knowledge, how knowledge was to be maintained, preserved and
>> transmitted. I am not imposing 15th-century ideas on earlier cultures. I am
>> reporting what those cultures said of themselves.
>>
>> And, yes, I know that Galileo worked for universities founded by Papal
>> decree. It is nevertheless incorrect to say that theologians funded
>> Galileo. The church had many arms, and the church often appointed priests
>> to manage them. Since all ordained priests were required to study theology
>> within their formative education, all were theologians in some sense.
>> Relatively few, however, were professional theologians.
>>
>> Since Galileo received patronage from high prelates at different points in
>> his career, it is in a sense true that theologians funded his work ? but
>> *not* in their capacity as theologians.
>>
>> When Galileo's research moved beyond the bounds of acceptable doctrine,
>> the Inquisition made a case against Galileo on theological grounds. The
>> inquisitors are the theologians to whom I referred. The inquisitors acted
>> as professional theologians within the scope of their assigned theological
>> duties. These theologians were not the same people who funded Galileo?s
>> earlier work.
>>
>> Before dispensing advice on the research that I should do, I?d suggest
>> that you catch up on your own reading. The Pandidakterion was, for all
>> practical purposes, a university, and many historians describe it as a
>> university. It did not have the university structure of the medieval
>> Western universities, but it did have the same kinds of professional
>> schools where people could study law and medicine, as well as other
>> disciplines. Like many Western universities, the role of the Pandidakterion
>> was to produce an educated professional bureaucracy to serve the needs of
>> the state.
>>
>> In the West, cathedral schools grew into universities with the right to
>> deliver the Studium Generale, and Papal foundations generally meant this at
>> the start. The Pandidakterion was a direct imperial foundation, and there
>> was no papal oversight. It had two or three dozen professorial chairs. The
>> professors functioned by teaching through a structure of disciplines
>> organized within schools. In this, the Pandidakterion partly resembled the
>> Library and Museion of Alexandria, which also functioned as a
>> university-like organization. The Library had a much larger staff than the
>> Pandidakterion, with over 80 permanent professorial chairs at its greatest
>> extent.
>>
>> If you are proposing The Pandidakterion as an example of holistic,
>> undivided knowledge, it is the wrong example. You can study nearly every
>> subject under the sun at The University of California, or at Oxford, or
>> Edinburgh. But you cannot study all this knowledge in one place, and you
>> are obliged to work your way through the disciplines before you are
>> admitted to higher study. Pandidakterion does not mean ?holistic
>> education.? Rather, it refers to an institution that has responsibility for
>> all the branches of learning in one place, much as a Pantheon is a place
>> that gathers all the gods of one tradition or religion.
>>
>> The Pandidakterion produced scholars, scientists, administrator, lawyers,
>> physicians, and bureaucrats. Most of these were specialists dedicated to
>> one profession or another, one discipline or another, much like the
>> graduates of the modern university. Ekphrasis is something else entirely ?
>> the mission of the Pandidakterion was to graduate experts, not to produce
>> ekphrasis.
>>
>> Yours,
>>
>> Ken Friedman
>>
>> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The
>> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji
>> University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL:
>> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-
>> design-economics-and-innovation/
>>
>> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
>> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
>> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
>> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>>
>> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia
>> http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>>
>>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 11:37 PM, Katreina Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear Ken,
>>>
>>> It would never seem correct if you are using the standards generated
>> after the 15th century.
>>> Concepts as "practical, fine and applied arts", "domains" "universities"
>> are maybe the ones that confuse you in finding the way to acknowledge the
>> "unified knowledge".
>>>
>>> Techne, episteme and philosophy governed the entire era of classical
>> Greece. If you want evidence, you can study a bit more the Parthenon and/or
>> Greek tragedy. No one speaks about "fine and applied arts" neither about
>> the way philosophy was recorded from the Enlightenment and on. Philosophia
>> means to be a friend with wisdom and for the ancient Greeks wisdom was the
>> process of contemplation.
>>>
>>> As for Byzantium there wasn't any University but a Pandidakterion which
>> literally means holistic education. You should go through an extended
>> research to examine how they managed to incorporate all fields of knowledge
>> and manifest it to a single Ekphrasis.
>>> When i am referring to economy, I don't mean finance, although i should
>> mention here that the ones you called "theologians" who thought that the
>> sun stands still, were the people who funded Galileo. You should consider
>> economy as the process of provision by which one is able to select their
>> investment in human capital.
>>>
>>> And this is actually where one can find the restore point. Hence, it is
>> not about the quantity of knowledge, or else we should refer to ourselves
>> as encyclopedists. It is more about what economy we use to acknowledge and
>> to use this knowledge.
>>>
>>> Katerina
>>>
>>>> On 02 Jun 2017, at 17:04, Ken Friedman <ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear Katerna,
>>>>
>>>> This account of an era of unified knowledge does not seem correct to me.
>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:55 PM, Katerna Karoussos <kkaroussos@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ?snip?
>>>>
>>>>> What seems strange to me is why, since we are discussing about
>> cultural heritage and art - science alliance, we consider them as separate.
>> The fragmentation in knowledge happened after the 15th century and had been
>> established in modern era, as knowledge economy. Before that, geometry,
>> physics, astronomy, medicine, arts, rhetoric and philosophy consisted the
>> body of knowledge which was indivisible.
>>>>> Hence, if we go back, searching for this specific restore point, in
>> where the holistic knowledge was the common process of learning,
>> researching, creating and producing, we will find all the necessary
>> elements for retrieving the ways that this knowledge can be activated in
>> nowadays.
>>>>
>>>> ?snip?
>>>>
>>>> First, there have been different accounts of the divisions of knowledge
>> domains over the centuries. There has never been a time anywhere in which
>> the several kinds of knowledge were considered whole and indivisible. The
>> divisions of knowledge domains that dominated classical Greece and the
>> post-Alexandrian Hellenic world did not include the practical arts or
>> professions in the domains of philosophy. Things changed again in the
>> medieval university, but even there, the trivium and quadrivium did not
>> include the fine or applied arts ? while the lower faculty of philosophy
>> was different to the higher faculties of medicine, law and theology.
>> Medicine itself distinguished between the medical theory taught at
>> university and the work of barber-surgeons who actually worked on patients.
>>>>
>>>> Second, the changes that took place in the 15th century did not come
>> about because of any shift in economic models. What happened was the
>> scientists began to look at the world. 15th-century physics was a branch of
>> natural philosophy. 15th-century physics accepted much of Aristotle?s
>> often-mistaken account translated through the lens of Ptolemy. The
>> Copernican model that arrived in the 16th century, followed by the work of
>> Galileo, Kepler, and Newton meant a different world. This was not a
>> ?fragmentation? of some unified knowledge that could be ?restored.? New
>> facts made it impossible to think of the world in a fuzzy way governed by
>> Aristotelian physics and a version of astrophysics dominated by Biblical
>> theology. Literalist theologians argue that the sun stood still in Joshua
>> 10. If the Biblical account is true, it cannot be true that the earth
>> revolves around the sun. Talking about this as ?holistic? knowledge doesn?t
>> make sense.
>>>>
>>>> Third, there is significantly more to know than there was to know in
>> the 15th century. In the 15th century, we had fewer books than the number
>> of volumes held in the Library of Alexandria when Callimachus organized the
>> great library catalogue known as the Pinakes. Today, we have far more.
>> Since the time of Gutenberg?s printing press, there have been millions of
>> books published. While I cannot track the numbers from Shanghai, I gather
>> that Google?s estimate of the world?s books runs to nearly 129,000,000
>> volumes not counting the same volume more than once. If you add journal
>> articles and other material, we?re talking about an amount of information
>> that makes a single knowledge domain impossible.
>>>>
>>>> Fourth, even within recognized disciplines, it is no longer possible
>> for anyone in any field to cover more than a tiny fraction of what there is
>> to know. When Henri Poincar? died in 1912, he was probably the last human
>> being to know and understand the complete mathematical corpus of the time
>> in which he lived. As for physics or even philosophy, the notion is
>> incredible.
>>>>
>>>> If my view is pessimistic, I?d be curious to know two things.
>>>>
>>>> First, what evidence is there for an era of unified knowledge? It seems
>> to me that a great deal of this idea is an optimistic notion based on an
>> inadequate understanding of the world by people who were simply wrong about
>> how much they knew, and just as wrong about how much of what they knew was
>> incorrect.
>>>>
>>>> Second, just how one can ?restore? this era in a world where there is
>> simply too much to know. I?m not asking how we can restore the illusion of
>> unified knowledge. Too me, that?s like the Bible museum diorama in which
>> you can see human beings living side by side with dinosaurs, rather like a
>> new version of the Flintstone cartoon series. I?m asking for a credible
>> account of how it is possible for anyone to restore an era of unified
>> knowledge in a world where nearly no one can credibly manage to know what
>> there is, even in their own field.
>>>>
>>>> It is one thing to argue in favor of interdisciplinary research. It is
>> another to do so without accounting for what we do not know, and cannot
>> know.
>>>>
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>
>>>> Ken Friedman
>>>>
>>>> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | ?? She Ji. The
>>>> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji
>>>> University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL:
>>>> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economi
>>>> cs-and-innovation/
>>>>
>>>> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
>>>> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
>>>> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
>>>> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>>>>
>>>> Email ken.friedman.sheji@icloud.com | Academia
>>>> http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I
>>>> http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>>>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>>>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>>>
>>>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>>>
>>>> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In
>> the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
>> password in the fields found further down the page.
>>>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
>> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on
>> the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>>>> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
>> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>>>> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
>>>> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>>
>>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>>
>>> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the
>> page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
>> password in the fields found further down the page.
>>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
>> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on
>> the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>>> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
>> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>>> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
>>> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>
>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>
>> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the
>> page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
>> password in the fields found further down the page.
>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
>> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on
>> the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest
>> Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
>> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>
>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>
>> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the
>> page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
>> password in the fields found further down the page.
>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
>> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on
>> the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest
>> Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to
>> http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
> TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
> If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
End of Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 154, Issue 1
**************************************************
_______________________________________________
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
SBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
If you prefer to read the posts on a blog go to http://yasminlist.blogspot.com/
