34 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2015
    1. These laws are particular responses to particular others, and from the very start they are dependent upon exclusion. The laws of hospitality must always be both hospitable and inhospitable, simultaneously welcoming and excluding.

      Right. Here we are. In the Derridian sense, the laws depend on exclusion. I'm with the author here. I'm not trying to contradict, I'm just trying to spin out the relationship between D's "h" and kindness and generosity mentioned above. One of the things I love about Derridian hospitality is that it is constituted by this tension, this contradiction, that--as soon as it is pointed out--becomes part of the meaning of the word. I'm guessing the caveat above re: kindness and generosity is aimed at an audience that might understand the word in other contexts. But, in my mind, once you Derridaize "hospitality" you can in fact understand it in terms of kindness, generosity, and (I'm going to argue) "service" as long as you Derridaize those words too. D's "h" can be about kindness and generosity insofar as these ideas have the same inherent antinomy the author talks about here. I'm riffing on this here because I want to see if we can connect a Derridian hospitality to a more pedestrian version of hospitality, not to dumb down or misread Derrida, but to see how his hospitality might already be at work in the conventional "kindness and generosity" version. In short, Derrida's hospitality is not only about kindness and generosity, but I'm guessing that Derrida's kindness and generosity are also not only about kindness and generosity. They depend on exclusion and limits, too.

    2. Further, in case the example of the suicide bomber has not yet made this clear, my characterization of the Internet as hospitable should not be understood in terms of the kindness or generosity that we typically associate with hospitality. Instead, the term describes the ethical difficulties of a network society, one in which we are forced to face up to the others that arrive in spaces, digital or otherwise.

      This gets at my comment above. I think, perhaps, that maybe our definition of hospitality could evolve to be as complicated as the one you are setting up here. In fact, I think that this is a great opportunity to kind of tease out the complexities of kindness and generosity. I know you get to this idea in a bit, but finitude limits kindness and generosity so every time that we make decisions about where to draw the lines, we create our circle of compassion or empathy or--we might say--hospitality. So even when we are being kind and generous, we are still drawing lines. In the hospitality industry, restaurants have a limited number of tables and reservations. People are going to get left out while others are ushered in, fed, and even comped a drink or an app.

    3. hospitable network means that information can flow relatively easily between nodes

      I like this definition. I am really interested in riffing on a Derridian notion of hospitality, this kind of networked hospitality, food networks, and the hospitality industry. There are a couple of things that I'm wondering at this point: what constitutes "information" and what constitutes "ease." I'm thinking about environments that are hospitable to certain microorganisms, but not others. So one kind of bacteria might move through with ease, while another might be killed off.

    1. Epicurus

      A sculpture of Epicurus

    2. Let no

      Note that you can comment on the audio in the embedded hypothes.is feature of the audio player.

    3. Greek Original [note]

      Saint-Andre licensed this with a Creative Commons license. He writes:

      By licensing this translation under Creative Commons CC0, I hereby release all legal and economic rights to this translation under all jurisdictions (including but not limited to the rights to copy, republish, translate, arrange, modify, and make derivative works from this translation), and I grant anyone the right to use this translation without conditions for any purpose. My intent is that this translation shall be free from all claims of copyright and therefore shall pass directly into the public domain.

    4. translated by Peter Saint-Andre (2011)

      This translation is by a self-proclaimed "technologist" who "made this translation of the Letter to Menoeceus of Epicurus from Greek into English in the year 2011."

    5. Letter to Menoeceus

      The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy calls Letter to Menoeceus "a précis of Epicurean ethics"

    1. This was read by Daniel Vimont and is distributed by LibriVox, which notes on its "About" page that:

      Librivox is a non-commercial, non-profit and ad-free project
      Librivox donates its recordings to the public domain
      Librivox is powered by volunteers
      Librivox maintains a loose and open structure
      Librivox welcomes all volunteers from across the globe, in all languages
  2. Sep 2015
    1. hile I agree wholeheartedly with Matt, the current system of peer review is part of what's broken, part of what's made a vibrant mode of scholarly communication undead

      Is peer review really broken?

    1. I'm really interested in the intersections of food delivery and rhetorical delivery. There are networks formed for food delivery that end up having significant rhetorical implications.

    1. 1996

      Those were the days.

    2. You are terrified of your own children, since they are natives in a world where you will always be immigrants

      I wonder if this is where the term "digital natives" comes from.

    3. It is an act of nature and it grows itself through our collective actions

      This is really interesting. The idea of cyberspace as part of a natural ecology is something the kind of breaks down the nature/culture RL/virtual binaries at the very same time that he's making a distinction between the construction of physical spaces and cyberspace. Cyberspace, here, is part of nature but manmade construction projects are not.

  3. Apr 2015
    1. argue that rhetoricians have long been interested in robot-like procedures. Given these machinic roots, we can understand a rhe - torical education as procedural and computational and as particularly well suited to a cultural moment in which we w