12 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2022
    1. We have to endlessly scroll and parse a ton of images and headlines before we can find something interesting to read.

      The randomness of interesting tidbits in a social media scroll help to put us in a state of flow. We get small hits of dopamine from finding interesting posts to fill in the gaps of the boring bits in between and suddenly find we've lost the day. As a result an endless scroll of varying quality might have the effect of making one feel productive when in fact a reasonably large proportion of your time is spent on useless and uninteresting content.

      This effect may be put even further out when it's done algorithmically and the dopamine hits become more frequent. Potentially worse than this, the depth of the insight found in most social feeds is very shallow and rarely ever deep. One is almost never invited to delve further to find new insights.


      How might a social media stream of content be leveraged to help people read more interesting and complex content? Could putting Jacques Derrida's texts into a social media-like framing create this? Then one could reply to the text by sentence or paragraph with their own notes. This is similar to the user interface of Hypothes.is, but Hypothes.is has a more traditional reading interface compared to the social media space. What if one interspersed multiple authors in short threads? What other methods might work to "trick" the human mind into having more fun and finding flow in their deeper and more engaged reading states?

      Link this to the idea of fun in Sönke Ahrens' How to Take Smart Notes.

    1. As Derrida writes ofthe computer, ‘I don’t feel the interposition of the machine as a sortof progress in transparency, univocity, or easiness. Rather, we areparticipating in a partly new plot’ (2005: 21). H
    2. , as a key historical technology ofinvention. I intend this last term in the precise sense in which Derrida(1989) understands it, that is, as an oscillation between theperformative and the constative, with the former working to disruptitself (the performative) and the latter (the constative) – or whatmight be termed the unsettling operation of invention.

      Derrida's definition of invention

  2. Dec 2021
    1. I’d fallen into the trap that the philosopher Jacques Derrida identified in an interview from the mid-nineties. “With the computer, everything is rapid and so easy,” he complained. “An interminable revision, an infinite analysis is already on the horizon.”

      This also ignores the context of a writing space that is optimized for the reading, thinking and writing process.

      Digital contexts often bring in a raft of other problems and issues that may provide too much.

  3. Jun 2021
    1. Three years ago, I began reading and annotating the work of the philosopher Jacques Derrida

      That's a way to start a project!

    1. Baudrillard

      Surprised to see Baudrillard categorized as harder? more opaque? more sophisticated? than Derrida... Someone who had read both might switch the order...

  4. Mar 2020
  5. Apr 2019
    1. As with justice and the law what becomes crucial within this conception of self and identity is the willingness to deconstruct or interpet. Damaging essentialization based on shoring-up (sure-ing up?) well worn binaries such as real/virtual, authentic/fake falls away as the ‘work’ of identity becomes interpretation, questioning and negotiation.

      Thinking of identity as contextual, interpretive, work-in-process, instead of as a static output, seems really positive and potentially integrative.

  6. Apr 2017
  7. Mar 2017
    1. He focuses on writing, as opposed to speech, as the exemplary form of language use, exemplary because it exists apart from the context of utterance or reception and thereby reveals, under the form of scrutiny Derrida calls "deconstruction," its dis-tance from its apparent reference.

      I'm hoping that the reading from Derrida we're doing later this semester clears this up, because I had no idea what he meant with this in On Grammatology.

  8. Jun 2016
  9. screen.oxfordjournals.org screen.oxfordjournals.org
    1. Michel Foucault raised another problem in his lecture: that ofecriture. I think it is better to give this discussion a name, since Iexpect that we have all been thinking of Derrida and his system.We know that Derrida is attempting (a gamble which I find para-doxical) to elaborate a philosophy of writing, while at the sametime denying the existence of the subject. This is all the morecurious since this concept of writing is otherwise very close to thedialectical concept of practice. To quote but one example amongothers: I can only agree with him when he tells us that writingleaves traces which eventually efface themselves; it is the propertyof every practice, be it the construction of a temple, which dis-appears after several centuries or millenia, the opening of a road,the altering of its course or, more prosaically, the manufacture of acouple of sausages which are then eaten

      Ties the discussion of ecriture to derrida.

  10. May 2016