15 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2019
    1. If what we want is democratic knowledge production that serves not only those who inquire and their institutions, but also those who are inquired upon (and appeals to “knowledge for the good of all” do not cut it), we must soften that boundary erected long ago between those who know versus those from whom the raw materials of knowledge production are extracted

      expand on this in the context of library classification

  2. Jan 2019
    1. Train someone in it and, according co Quintilian's way of thinking, you have trained that person to be virtuous. "Virtuosity is some evidence of virtue." To chink of this at/through toggle switch as "virtuous," as implicitly moral, is to com-prehend the deeply felt "reasoning" behind Quintilian's evasive answer to his own question and to glimpse, perhaps, the beginnings of a legitimate explanation of, and justification for, what the humanities do--or at least can do.

      The image of Lady Justice popped into my head as I was reading this, and I was particularly thinking about her blindfold and how it's meant to represent impartiality, the philosphical ideal that "justice should be applied "without regard to wealth, power, or other status." Upon looking at her Wikipedia page, I discovered that Lady Justice did not originally wear a blindfold because her "maidenly form" guaranteed her impartiality. If we're "toggling" between rhetoric and philosophy here, then it must also be argued that we're "toggling" between the feminine and the masculine. And If sex/gender was once what qualified someone to be impartial, how does this complicate the idea of virtue/training someone to be virtuous? How does it complicate our understanding of what the humanities do/can do? How does it help us work at/through what/who was/is/could be considered human?

  3. Jun 2018
  4. Nov 2017
  5. Mar 2017
    1. binaries

      I noticed this in the excerpt above, too. The binary nature of her worldview is something that I've heard her critiqued for before, as it is a pretty restrictive way to view the complex gears of oppression.

  6. Feb 2017
    1. how clothing defines masculinity and femininity — and how it scrambles these notions

      Discussion Question:

      What are the major differences of and consequences for:

      Interpretations of masculinity and femininity, defining masculinity and femininity vs. blurring the notions of gender and dissecting the system of a gender binary.

    1. In short, emphasizes Nietzsche, "la11gue1ge is rhetoric, because it desires to convey only a doxa [opinion], not an episteme [knowledge]."

      With the marginal note from Nathaniel in mind, this binary is really interesting (and necessary) to unpack. I've had to read a lot of Foucault lately, so I'm thinking with him through a lot of my other readings right now. But his use of episteme, in some ways, breaks down that binary. By treating an episteme as the "epistemological unconscious" of an era (meaning that some knowledge and some assumptions are so inherent at a specific time and place that society doesn't even know it's happening), Foucault seems to suggest that opinion and knowledge can uniquely shift and intertwine in each epoch (again, within a culture that doesn't even know it's happening).

  7. Jan 2017
  8. Sep 2016
  9. Jul 2016
    1. Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised that the idea of using digital technology in the classroom tends to be either loved or hated.
  10. Oct 2013
    1. 010101000110100001101001011100110010000001100010011011110110111101101011001000000111011101100001011100110010000001110111011100100110100101110100011101000110010101101110001000000110001001111001001000000100101001100001011010110110010100100000010010000110000101110010011101000110111001100101011011000110110000001101000010100100000101101110011001000010000001100101011001000110100101110100011001010110010000100000011000100111100100111010001000000100101101100001011101000110100001101100011001010110010101101110001000000100110101101001011011000110110001100101011100100000110100001010010000110110111101110000011110010111001001101001011001110110100001110100001000000011001000110000001100010011001100100000010010100110000101101011011001010010000001001000011000010111001001110100011011100110010101101100011011000000110100001010011010000111010001110100011100000011101000101111001011110011001000110011011100100110010001000011011001010110111001110100011101010111001001111001010100100110111101101101011000010110111001100011011001010010111001100011011011110110110100101111000011010000101001010110011001010111001001110011011010010110111101101110001000000011000100101110001100000010111000110000000011010000101000001101000010100100001101101111011101100110010101110010001000000100000101110010011101000010000001100010011110010010000001001101011010010110110001100101011100110010000001001010011011110110100001101110011100110111010001101111011011100010000010101001001100100011000000110001001100100000110100001010000010010000100100100000001000000110100001110100011101000111000000111010001011110010111101101101011010010110110001100101011100110010110101100001011100100111010000101110011000100110110001101111011001110111001101110000011011110111010000101110011000110110111101101101001011110000110100001010

      Nice Touch. Translates as:This book was written by Jake Hartnell And edited by: Kathleen Miller Copyright 2013 Jake Hartnell http://23rdCenturyRomance.com/ Version 1.0.0

      Cover Art by Miles Johnston ©2012 http://miles-art.blogspot.com/

    1. Nice touch, translates to: This book was written by Jake Hartnell And edited by: Kathleen Miller Copyright 2013 Jake Hartnell http://23rdCenturyRomance.com/ Version 1.0.0

      Cover Art by Miles Johnston ©2012 http://miles-art.blogspot.com/