home.social

#theory — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #theory, aggregated by home.social.

  1. CW: Randomly-generated conspiracy theory

    The Biden administration is trying to obtain 5.3 metric pounds of pineapple. I know because the Biden administration is controlling everything , and the Biden administration has included it in their manifesto . #theory

  2. We see the fundamental theorem of arithmetic and the sieve of Eratosthenes in the decomposition into weight × level + jump of natural numbers. Applied to prime numbers this decomposition leads to a new classification of primes.

    #decompwlj #math #mathematics #maths #sequence #OEIS #graph #numbers #primes #PrimeNumbers #FundamentalTheoremOfArithmetic #sequences #NumberTheory #classification #integer #decomposition #number #theory #equation #graphs #SieveofEratosthenes #sieve #Eratosthenes #fundamental #theorem #arithmetic #research

  3. My first, favorite and most important sequence, the weights of prime numbers: A117078
    We see prime numbers classified by level and by weight on the graph.

    A117078: a(n) is the smallest k such that prime(n+1) = prime(n) + (prime(n) mod k), or 0 if no such k exists ➡️ oeis.org/A117078

    #decompwlj #math #mathematics #maths #sequence #OEIS #graph #3D #numbers #primes #PrimeNumbers #FundamentalTheoremOfArithmetic #sequences #NumberTheory #classification #integer #decomposition #number #theory #equation #graphs #sieve #fundamental #theorem #arithmetic #research

  4. Album Songbooks
    Альбоми піснярів, Альбомы песенников, песенники
    #Songbooks #песенники
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/429

    Ноты, notes, нота
    #Ноты, #notes, #нота
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/428

    Средневековая бытовая музыка, Фольклор, Джаз, Рок
    Середньовічна побутова музика, Фольклор, Джаз, Рок
    Medieval household music, Folklore, Jazz, Rock
    #Фольклор, #Джаз, #Рок #Folklore, #Jazz, #Rock
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/425

    О композиторах, About composers, Про композиторів
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/424

    Книги композиторов и книги о дирижёрах и исполнителях
    Книги композиторів і книги про диригентів і виконавців
    Books by composers and books about conductors and performers
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/423

    История музыки, размышления
    Music history, reflections
    Історія музики, роздуми
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/422

    Анализ творчества композиторов
    Аналіз творчості композиторів
    Analysis of composers' creativity
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/419

    Эстетика, психология музыки, медицина и др
    Aesthetics, psychology of music, medicine, etc.
    Естетика, психологія музики, медицина та ін
    #Эстетика, #психологиямузыки, #медицина и др
    #Aesthetics, #psychology of music, #medicine, etc.
    #Естетика, #психологія
    музики, #медицина та ін
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/415

    Статьи, очерки о музыке, эссе
    Статті, нариси про музику, есе
    Articles, essays about music, essays
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/414

    Словари, справочники, документы, музыкальные программы
    Словники, довідники, документи, музичні програми
    Dictionaries, reference books, documents, music programs музыка
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/412

    Оркестровка, инструментовка, чтение партитур
    Orchestration, instrumentation, reading scores
    Оркестровка, інструментування, читання партитур музыка
    #Оркестровка, #инструментовка, #чтениепартитур
    #Orchestration, #instrumentation, #reading scores
    #Оркестровка, #інструментування, #читання
    партитур_музыка
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/411

    Народное творчество, фольклор, декоративно-прикладное искусство
    Народна творчість, фольклор
    Folk art, folklore
    #Народноетворчество, #фольклор, #декоративноприкладноеискусство
    #Народна
    творчість, #фольклор
    #Folk art, #folklore
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/410

    Методика, руководства, обучающие материалы
    Methodology, manuals, training materials
    Методика, керівництва, навчальні матеріали музыка
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/409

    История музыки и монографии
    Історія музики та монографії
    Music History and monographs
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/408

    Гармония, теория, полифония, композиция
    Harmony, theory, polyphony, composition
    Гармонія, теорія, поліфонія, композиція музыка
    #Гармония, #теория, #полифония, #композиция
    #Harmony, #theory, #polyphony, #composition
    #Гармонія, #теорія, #поліфонія, #композиція #музыка
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/407

    Автобиографии, воспоминания, письма, мемуары
    Autobiographies, memoirs, letters, memoirs
    Автобіографії, спогади, листи, мемуари музыка
    #Автобиографии, #воспоминания, #письма, #мемуары
    #Autobiographies, #memoirs, #letters, #memoirs
    t.me/scilib_yura15cbx/405

  5. 🤯 Ah yes, yet another ground-breaking revelation: #markets are competitive only if #P #equals NP! Because apparently, all this time, the #stock #market was just a simple computer science problem waiting to be solved by the right code wizard. 📈💻 Clearly, the biggest obstacle for #Wall #Street was not greed or regulation, but a basic understanding of #algorithm theory! 🤦‍♂️
    arxiv.org/abs/2602.20415 #competitiveness #NP #theory #HackerNews #ngated

  6. Critique Is Over, Morality Is Dead, and Surreal Utopias Are Where It’s At

    An article by #LuceDeLire in #eflux journal.

    Intellectuals used to publicly critique the powerful on moral grounds. Today, both critique and morality have become dysfunctional—for perfectly political and material reasons. I argue that, for political gains, we should now craft surreal utopias—hospitable, euphoric, lesbian.

    e-flux.com/journal/163/6776891

    #humanities #philosophy #intellectuals #socialmedia #queer #queerart #theory #queertheory

  7. #Galois #Theory, developed by Évariste Galois, is a branch of abstract #Algebra linking #Field theory (studying number systems) and #Group theory (studying symmetries) to understand #Polynomial #Equations.

    knowledgezone.co.in/kbits/684d

  8. Trans people are not the only ones who dissociate—but we tend to be good at it. We’re a kind of people who need to not be in body or world. The body feels wrong. The world treats us as wrong. Dissociation can be debilitating. And also sometimes not. I used to write a lot, in dissociated states. Then I transitioned, and couldn’t write at all. And yet still needed to dissociate. I felt better about being embodied, but the world didn’t. So—raves. And out of raves, the writing came back, slowly.
    I want to recover at least some kinds of dissociation from the language of psychiatrists. I want to find ways this disability can also be enabling. A way to find out things about the world. So now I have two dissociated practices that I need to live: raving and writing. Raving got the writing going again. It’s a challenge to bring them together. It’s taking patience, and practice.

    Wark, M. (2023) Raving, Durham, London, Duke University Press.

    #transgender #trans #theory #raving #McKenzieWark

  9. Trans people are not the only ones who dissociate—but we tend to be good at it. We’re a kind of people who need to not be in body or world. The body feels wrong. The world treats us as wrong. Dissociation can be debilitating. And also sometimes not. I used to write a lot, in dissociated states. Then I transitioned, and couldn’t write at all. And yet still needed to dissociate. I felt better about being embodied, but the world didn’t. So—raves. And out of raves, the writing came back, slowly.
    I want to recover at least some kinds of dissociation from the language of psychiatrists. I want to find ways this disability can also be enabling. A way to find out things about the world. So now I have two dissociated practices that I need to live: raving and writing. Raving got the writing going again. It’s a challenge to bring them together. It’s taking patience, and practice.

    Wark, M. (2023) Raving, Durham, London, Duke University Press.

    #transgender #trans #theory #raving #McKenzieWark

  10. Trans people are not the only ones who dissociate—but we tend to be good at it. We’re a kind of people who need to not be in body or world. The body feels wrong. The world treats us as wrong. Dissociation can be debilitating. And also sometimes not. I used to write a lot, in dissociated states. Then I transitioned, and couldn’t write at all. And yet still needed to dissociate. I felt better about being embodied, but the world didn’t. So—raves. And out of raves, the writing came back, slowly.
    I want to recover at least some kinds of dissociation from the language of psychiatrists. I want to find ways this disability can also be enabling. A way to find out things about the world. So now I have two dissociated practices that I need to live: raving and writing. Raving got the writing going again. It’s a challenge to bring them together. It’s taking patience, and practice.

    Wark, M. (2023) Raving, Durham, London, Duke University Press.

    #transgender #trans #theory #raving #McKenzieWark

  11. Trans people are not the only ones who dissociate—but we tend to be good at it. We’re a kind of people who need to not be in body or world. The body feels wrong. The world treats us as wrong. Dissociation can be debilitating. And also sometimes not. I used to write a lot, in dissociated states. Then I transitioned, and couldn’t write at all. And yet still needed to dissociate. I felt better about being embodied, but the world didn’t. So—raves. And out of raves, the writing came back, slowly.
    I want to recover at least some kinds of dissociation from the language of psychiatrists. I want to find ways this disability can also be enabling. A way to find out things about the world. So now I have two dissociated practices that I need to live: raving and writing. Raving got the writing going again. It’s a challenge to bring them together. It’s taking patience, and practice.

    Wark, M. (2023) Raving, Durham, London, Duke University Press.

    #transgender #trans #theory #raving #McKenzieWark

  12. Open Humanities Press has published a 2nd edition of Timothy Morton's Realist Magic: Objects, Ontology, Causality. Comes complete with a new preface by Morton.

    Like all OHP books, Realist Magic is available open access:

    openhumanitiespress.org/books/

    Book description

    #ObjectOriented ontology offers a startlingly fresh way to think about causality that takes into account developments in #physics since 1900. Causality, argues Object Oriented Ontology (OOO), is #aesthetic. In this book, Timothy Morton explores what it means to say that a thing has come into being, that it is persisting, and that it has ended. Drawing from examples in #physics, #biology, #ecology, #art, #literature and #music, Morton demonstrates the counterintuitive yet elegant explanatory power of OOO for thinking causality.

    #philosophy #theory

    The book is published as part of the New Metaphysics series:

    openhumanitiespress.org/books/

  13. This Saturday was 3rd 🎂 of my article in International Studies Quarterly presenting an #anarcho-#pacifist reading of #IR (freely available via #openaccess): doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqac070

    Short thread summary: Paper seeks to articulate overdue #anarchopacifist lens to #IR #theory. Explicitly #critical & #normative. Starts with brief #history of cross-pollination between #anarchism & #pacifism.

  14. Is there a middle ground between bourgeois theory and avant-garde theory?

    There’s a blistering critique in Gary Hall’s Masked Media of what he terms, drawing on McKenzie Wark’s account of the novel, bourgeois theory. As he puts it on pg 185, bourgeois theory is rendered unserious and slightly ridiculous by being stuck in antiquated modes which leave it unable to address new conditions. To the extent it tries to address these conditions, it does so in a deeply superficial way:

    Bourgeois theory clearly ‘isn’t working’, then. The nonhuman, anthropogenic climate breakdown, ecocide, the Anthropocene: all exceed what the form of proper theory can currently express. Like the novel, theory has not adapted to the new reality ushered in by the Anthropocene, including all those laws and legal decisions that are starting to pile up around the question of the rights of nature. (For sure, the last thing bourgeois legacy theorists want is for any of this to actually impact on their own ways of performing as great authors.) Instead, theory ‘imposes itself on a nature it cannot really perceive or value’ (Wark 2017d). Just as ‘serious fiction, like bourgeois culture, now seems rather unserious, indeed frivolous’, so too does serious theory (2017d). The nonhuman may be what a lot of contemporary theory studies and writes about, but it cannot take seriously the implications of the nonhuman for theory. As a result, the current landfill of theoretical literature on the Anthropocene is merely a form of bourgeois liberal humanism smeared with nonhuman filler – objects, materials, technologies, animals, insects, plants, fungi, compost, viruses, microbes, stones, geological formations – to make it appear otherwise.

    He frames a concern with biography as quintessentially bourgeois but a reflexivity in regards to practice as anti-bourgeois. The problem I see is that this draws the boundary of what constitutes anti-bourgeois theory so restrictively that I’m not sure who, other than Gary Hall some of the time, actually falls within it. It’s a combination of impacting upon actual practice, one’s own and that of others, but furthermore doing so in a conceptual mode predicated upon the evacuation of the inherited conceptual legacies which inevitably litter thought and speech. From pg 143-144

    The performance of serious theory today is therefore as formally limited to bourgeois liberal humanism as the novel. (As Wark says in her earlier text on Moretti and the bourgeois novel: ‘It is about making something of this world, not transcending it in favor of another’. When it comes to the ‘bourgeois sensibility’ there is no adventuring into the unknown, ‘no spontaneous bravery’, ‘“few surprises”’. It might be ‘hard work’, being a bourgeois writer or theorist, then, ‘but it’s a steady job’ [2013].)79 This means that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for even the most radical of political theories to do anything other than exclude the diversity of human and nonhuman presences. To sample and remix Wark’s text on the novel in the Anthropocene in order to further undercut notions of the author as self-identical human individual: anything that would actually impact on the concealment of theory’s established scaffolding, how it is created, disseminated and monetised, is regarded as not proper, eccentric, odd and risks banishment. ‘But from what? Polite bourgeois society?’ (2017d). The for-profit world of Verso books and Routledge journals where proper theory is to be found?

    My love/hate relationship with Gary Hall’s work comes, I think, from sharing aspects of his critique of bourgeois theory but finding avant-garde theorising even more off putting. Firstly, it imagines itself as standing outside of the circuits of (academic) accumulation whereas the valorisation of conceptual and linguistic novelty is a primary strategy to accumulate status and prestige within significant parts of the academy. Secondly, it takes what can sometimes feel like a sneering stance towards accepting the doxa of the field, misconstruing a necessary condition of working within a social field as a failure of cultural imagination. It’s another variation of the ‘sociology as a calling’ / ‘scholarship as a vocation’ tendency which I’ve come to see as deeply psychically pernicious, postulating a sphere of autonomous enjoyment (good thing) which I suspect for many people is functionally a disavowal of the conditions of their own labour (bad thing). Thirdly, it hinders the emergence of a middle ground between these two categories by predicating the cultivation of scholarly reflexivity under changing sociotechnical conditions (i.e. the project which animates my educational work) upon a particular style of conceptualising those conditions.

    It bundles together two moves which I don’t think are necessarily connected and I suspect are probably antithetical to each other. It’s a heavily aestheticised mode of concept-work geared towards the hyperactive (and implicitly) competitive production of linguistic and conceptual novelty. Whereas if we see it as desirable that we do work which, to use Hall’s work, would “actually impact on the concealment of theory’s established scaffolding, how it is created, disseminated and monetised” this raises the question of the relationship between theory and this outcome. I’m persuaded enough by Jana Bacevic’s core thesis (see also) that it seems obvious theory does not and could not automatically produce this outcome. Hence the question of the relationship, as well as our meta-theoretical, methodological and reflexive relationship to that relationship, which are exactly the things I think Hall’s approach unintentionally obfuscates alongside what can at other points be examples of remarkable lucidity.

    I admire Hall’s real impact through the many initiatives he’s played a leading role in but I struggle to see how his theoretical approach helps those undertakings and suspect it might actually hinder them. There are modes of theorising between the bourgeois and the avant-garde which, it seems to me, could more directly serve these purposes.

    (Plus when a billion people worldwide are regularly using the most sophisticated machinery for conceptual and linguistic novelty that has ever existed, the quality of that novelty becomes even more important than it has been previously)

    #avantGardeTheorising #bourgeoisTheory #mckenzieWark #RosiBraidotti #theorising #theory

  15. Is there a middle ground between bourgeois theory and avant-garde theory?

    There’s a blistering critique in Gary Hall’s Masked Media of what he terms, drawing on McKenzie Wark’s account of the novel, bourgeois theory. As he puts it on pg 185, bourgeois theory is rendered unserious and slightly ridiculous by being stuck in antiquated modes which leave it unable to address new conditions. To the extent it tries to address these conditions, it does so in a deeply superficial way:

    Bourgeois theory clearly ‘isn’t working’, then. The nonhuman, anthropogenic climate breakdown, ecocide, the Anthropocene: all exceed what the form of proper theory can currently express. Like the novel, theory has not adapted to the new reality ushered in by the Anthropocene, including all those laws and legal decisions that are starting to pile up around the question of the rights of nature. (For sure, the last thing bourgeois legacy theorists want is for any of this to actually impact on their own ways of performing as great authors.) Instead, theory ‘imposes itself on a nature it cannot really perceive or value’ (Wark 2017d). Just as ‘serious fiction, like bourgeois culture, now seems rather unserious, indeed frivolous’, so too does serious theory (2017d). The nonhuman may be what a lot of contemporary theory studies and writes about, but it cannot take seriously the implications of the nonhuman for theory. As a result, the current landfill of theoretical literature on the Anthropocene is merely a form of bourgeois liberal humanism smeared with nonhuman filler – objects, materials, technologies, animals, insects, plants, fungi, compost, viruses, microbes, stones, geological formations – to make it appear otherwise.

    He frames a concern with biography as quintessentially bourgeois but a reflexivity in regards to practice as anti-bourgeois. The problem I see is that this draws the boundary of what constitutes anti-bourgeois theory so restrictively that I’m not sure who, other than Gary Hall some of the time, actually falls within it. It’s a combination of impacting upon actual practice, one’s own and that of others, but furthermore doing so in a conceptual mode predicated upon the evacuation of the inherited conceptual legacies which inevitably litter thought and speech. From pg 143-144

    The performance of serious theory today is therefore as formally limited to bourgeois liberal humanism as the novel. (As Wark says in her earlier text on Moretti and the bourgeois novel: ‘It is about making something of this world, not transcending it in favor of another’. When it comes to the ‘bourgeois sensibility’ there is no adventuring into the unknown, ‘no spontaneous bravery’, ‘“few surprises”’. It might be ‘hard work’, being a bourgeois writer or theorist, then, ‘but it’s a steady job’ [2013].)79 This means that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for even the most radical of political theories to do anything other than exclude the diversity of human and nonhuman presences. To sample and remix Wark’s text on the novel in the Anthropocene in order to further undercut notions of the author as self-identical human individual: anything that would actually impact on the concealment of theory’s established scaffolding, how it is created, disseminated and monetised, is regarded as not proper, eccentric, odd and risks banishment. ‘But from what? Polite bourgeois society?’ (2017d). The for-profit world of Verso books and Routledge journals where proper theory is to be found?

    My love/hate relationship with Gary Hall’s work comes, I think, from sharing aspects of his critique of bourgeois theory but finding avant-garde theorising even more off putting. Firstly, it imagines itself as standing outside of the circuits of (academic) accumulation whereas the valorisation of conceptual and linguistic novelty is a primary strategy to accumulate status and prestige within significant parts of the academy. Secondly, it takes what can sometimes feel like a sneering stance towards accepting the doxa of the field, misconstruing a necessary condition of working within a social field as a failure of cultural imagination. It’s another variation of the ‘sociology as a calling’ / ‘scholarship as a vocation’ tendency which I’ve come to see as deeply psychically pernicious, postulating a sphere of autonomous enjoyment (good thing) which I suspect for many people is functionally a disavowal of the conditions of their own labour (bad thing). Thirdly, it hinders the emergence of a middle ground between these two categories by predicating the cultivation of scholarly reflexivity under changing sociotechnical conditions (i.e. the project which animates my educational work) upon a particular style of conceptualising those conditions.

    It bundles together two moves which I don’t think are necessarily connected and I suspect are probably antithetical to each other. It’s a heavily aestheticised mode of concept-work geared towards the hyperactive (and implicitly) competitive production of linguistic and conceptual novelty. Whereas if we see it as desirable that we do work which, to use Hall’s work, would “actually impact on the concealment of theory’s established scaffolding, how it is created, disseminated and monetised” this raises the question of the relationship between theory and this outcome. I’m persuaded enough by Jana Bacevic’s core thesis (see also) that it seems obvious theory does not and could not automatically produce this outcome. Hence the question of the relationship, as well as our meta-theoretical, methodological and reflexive relationship to that relationship, which are exactly the things I think Hall’s approach unintentionally obfuscates alongside what can at other points be examples of remarkable lucidity.

    I admire Hall’s real impact through the many initiatives he’s played a leading role in but I struggle to see how his theoretical approach helps those undertakings and suspect it might actually hinder them. There are modes of theorising between the bourgeois and the avant-garde which, it seems to me, could more directly serve these purposes.

    (Plus when a billion people worldwide are regularly using the most sophisticated machinery for conceptual and linguistic novelty that has ever existed, the quality of that novelty becomes even more important than it has been previously)

    #avantGardeTheorising #bourgeoisTheory #mckenzieWark #RosiBraidotti #theorising #theory

  16. Is there a middle ground between bourgeois theory and avant-garde theory?

    There’s a blistering critique in Gary Hall’s Masked Media of what he terms, drawing on McKenzie Wark’s account of the novel, bourgeois theory. As he puts it on pg 185, bourgeois theory is rendered unserious and slightly ridiculous by being stuck in antiquated modes which leave it unable to address new conditions. To the extent it tries to address these conditions, it does so in a deeply superficial way:

    Bourgeois theory clearly ‘isn’t working’, then. The nonhuman, anthropogenic climate breakdown, ecocide, the Anthropocene: all exceed what the form of proper theory can currently express. Like the novel, theory has not adapted to the new reality ushered in by the Anthropocene, including all those laws and legal decisions that are starting to pile up around the question of the rights of nature. (For sure, the last thing bourgeois legacy theorists want is for any of this to actually impact on their own ways of performing as great authors.) Instead, theory ‘imposes itself on a nature it cannot really perceive or value’ (Wark 2017d). Just as ‘serious fiction, like bourgeois culture, now seems rather unserious, indeed frivolous’, so too does serious theory (2017d). The nonhuman may be what a lot of contemporary theory studies and writes about, but it cannot take seriously the implications of the nonhuman for theory. As a result, the current landfill of theoretical literature on the Anthropocene is merely a form of bourgeois liberal humanism smeared with nonhuman filler – objects, materials, technologies, animals, insects, plants, fungi, compost, viruses, microbes, stones, geological formations – to make it appear otherwise.

    He frames a concern with biography as quintessentially bourgeois but a reflexivity in regards to practice as anti-bourgeois. The problem I see is that this draws the boundary of what constitutes anti-bourgeois theory so restrictively that I’m not sure who, other than Gary Hall some of the time, actually falls within it. It’s a combination of impacting upon actual practice, one’s own and that of others, but furthermore doing so in a conceptual mode predicated upon the evacuation of the inherited conceptual legacies which inevitably litter thought and speech. From pg 143-144

    The performance of serious theory today is therefore as formally limited to bourgeois liberal humanism as the novel. (As Wark says in her earlier text on Moretti and the bourgeois novel: ‘It is about making something of this world, not transcending it in favor of another’. When it comes to the ‘bourgeois sensibility’ there is no adventuring into the unknown, ‘no spontaneous bravery’, ‘“few surprises”’. It might be ‘hard work’, being a bourgeois writer or theorist, then, ‘but it’s a steady job’ [2013].)79 This means that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for even the most radical of political theories to do anything other than exclude the diversity of human and nonhuman presences. To sample and remix Wark’s text on the novel in the Anthropocene in order to further undercut notions of the author as self-identical human individual: anything that would actually impact on the concealment of theory’s established scaffolding, how it is created, disseminated and monetised, is regarded as not proper, eccentric, odd and risks banishment. ‘But from what? Polite bourgeois society?’ (2017d). The for-profit world of Verso books and Routledge journals where proper theory is to be found?

    My love/hate relationship with Gary Hall’s work comes, I think, from sharing aspects of his critique of bourgeois theory but finding avant-garde theorising even more off putting. Firstly, it imagines itself as standing outside of the circuits of (academic) accumulation whereas the valorisation of conceptual and linguistic novelty is a primary strategy to accumulate status and prestige within significant parts of the academy. Secondly, it takes what can sometimes feel like a sneering stance towards accepting the doxa of the field, misconstruing a necessary condition of working within a social field as a failure of cultural imagination. It’s another variation of the ‘sociology as a calling’ / ‘scholarship as a vocation’ tendency which I’ve come to see as deeply psychically pernicious, postulating a sphere of autonomous enjoyment (good thing) which I suspect for many people is functionally a disavowal of the conditions of their own labour (bad thing). Thirdly, it hinders the emergence of a middle ground between these two categories by predicating the cultivation of scholarly reflexivity under changing sociotechnical conditions (i.e. the project which animates my educational work) upon a particular style of conceptualising those conditions.

    It bundles together two moves which I don’t think are necessarily connected and I suspect are probably antithetical to each other. It’s a heavily aestheticised mode of concept-work geared towards the hyperactive (and implicitly) competitive production of linguistic and conceptual novelty. Whereas if we see it as desirable that we do work which, to use Hall’s work, would “actually impact on the concealment of theory’s established scaffolding, how it is created, disseminated and monetised” this raises the question of the relationship between theory and this outcome. I’m persuaded enough by Jana Bacevic’s core thesis (see also) that it seems obvious theory does not and could not automatically produce this outcome. Hence the question of the relationship, as well as our meta-theoretical, methodological and reflexive relationship to that relationship, which are exactly the things I think Hall’s approach unintentionally obfuscates alongside what can at other points be examples of remarkable lucidity.

    I admire Hall’s real impact through the many initiatives he’s played a leading role in but I struggle to see how his theoretical approach helps those undertakings and suspect it might actually hinder them. There are modes of theorising between the bourgeois and the avant-garde which, it seems to me, could more directly serve these purposes.

    (Plus when a billion people worldwide are regularly using the most sophisticated machinery for conceptual and linguistic novelty that has ever existed, the quality of that novelty becomes even more important than it has been previously)

    #avantGardeTheorising #bourgeoisTheory #mckenzieWark #RosiBraidotti #theorising #theory

  17. Is there a middle ground between bourgeois theory and avant-garde theory?

    There’s a blistering critique in Gary Hall’s Masked Media of what he terms, drawing on McKenzie Wark’s account of the novel, bourgeois theory. As he puts it on pg 185, bourgeois theory is rendered unserious and slightly ridiculous by being stuck in antiquated modes which leave it unable to address new conditions. To the extent it tries to address these conditions, it does so in a deeply superficial way:

    Bourgeois theory clearly ‘isn’t working’, then. The nonhuman, anthropogenic climate breakdown, ecocide, the Anthropocene: all exceed what the form of proper theory can currently express. Like the novel, theory has not adapted to the new reality ushered in by the Anthropocene, including all those laws and legal decisions that are starting to pile up around the question of the rights of nature. (For sure, the last thing bourgeois legacy theorists want is for any of this to actually impact on their own ways of performing as great authors.) Instead, theory ‘imposes itself on a nature it cannot really perceive or value’ (Wark 2017d). Just as ‘serious fiction, like bourgeois culture, now seems rather unserious, indeed frivolous’, so too does serious theory (2017d). The nonhuman may be what a lot of contemporary theory studies and writes about, but it cannot take seriously the implications of the nonhuman for theory. As a result, the current landfill of theoretical literature on the Anthropocene is merely a form of bourgeois liberal humanism smeared with nonhuman filler – objects, materials, technologies, animals, insects, plants, fungi, compost, viruses, microbes, stones, geological formations – to make it appear otherwise.

    He frames a concern with biography as quintessentially bourgeois but a reflexivity in regards to practice as anti-bourgeois. The problem I see is that this draws the boundary of what constitutes anti-bourgeois theory so restrictively that I’m not sure who, other than Gary Hall some of the time, actually falls within it. It’s a combination of impacting upon actual practice, one’s own and that of others, but furthermore doing so in a conceptual mode predicated upon the evacuation of the inherited conceptual legacies which inevitably litter thought and speech. From pg 143-144

    The performance of serious theory today is therefore as formally limited to bourgeois liberal humanism as the novel. (As Wark says in her earlier text on Moretti and the bourgeois novel: ‘It is about making something of this world, not transcending it in favor of another’. When it comes to the ‘bourgeois sensibility’ there is no adventuring into the unknown, ‘no spontaneous bravery’, ‘“few surprises”’. It might be ‘hard work’, being a bourgeois writer or theorist, then, ‘but it’s a steady job’ [2013].)79 This means that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for even the most radical of political theories to do anything other than exclude the diversity of human and nonhuman presences. To sample and remix Wark’s text on the novel in the Anthropocene in order to further undercut notions of the author as self-identical human individual: anything that would actually impact on the concealment of theory’s established scaffolding, how it is created, disseminated and monetised, is regarded as not proper, eccentric, odd and risks banishment. ‘But from what? Polite bourgeois society?’ (2017d). The for-profit world of Verso books and Routledge journals where proper theory is to be found?

    My love/hate relationship with Gary Hall’s work comes, I think, from sharing aspects of his critique of bourgeois theory but finding avant-garde theorising even more off putting. Firstly, it imagines itself as standing outside of the circuits of (academic) accumulation whereas the valorisation of conceptual and linguistic novelty is a primary strategy to accumulate status and prestige within significant parts of the academy. Secondly, it takes what can sometimes feel like a sneering stance towards accepting the doxa of the field, misconstruing a necessary condition of working within a social field as a failure of cultural imagination. It’s another variation of the ‘sociology as a calling’ / ‘scholarship as a vocation’ tendency which I’ve come to see as deeply psychically pernicious, postulating a sphere of autonomous enjoyment (good thing) which I suspect for many people is functionally a disavowal of the conditions of their own labour (bad thing). Thirdly, it hinders the emergence of a middle ground between these two categories by predicating the cultivation of scholarly reflexivity under changing sociotechnical conditions (i.e. the project which animates my educational work) upon a particular style of conceptualising those conditions.

    It bundles together two moves which I don’t think are necessarily connected and I suspect are probably antithetical to each other. It’s a heavily aestheticised mode of concept-work geared towards the hyperactive (and implicitly) competitive production of linguistic and conceptual novelty. Whereas if we see it as desirable that we do work which, to use Hall’s work, would “actually impact on the concealment of theory’s established scaffolding, how it is created, disseminated and monetised” this raises the question of the relationship between theory and this outcome. I’m persuaded enough by Jana Bacevic’s core thesis (see also) that it seems obvious theory does not and could not automatically produce this outcome. Hence the question of the relationship, as well as our meta-theoretical, methodological and reflexive relationship to that relationship, which are exactly the things I think Hall’s approach unintentionally obfuscates alongside what can at other points be examples of remarkable lucidity.

    I admire Hall’s real impact through the many initiatives he’s played a leading role in but I struggle to see how his theoretical approach helps those undertakings and suspect it might actually hinder them. There are modes of theorising between the bourgeois and the avant-garde which, it seems to me, could more directly serve these purposes.

    (Plus when a billion people worldwide are regularly using the most sophisticated machinery for conceptual and linguistic novelty that has ever existed, the quality of that novelty becomes even more important than it has been previously)

    #avantGardeTheorising #bourgeoisTheory #mckenzieWark #RosiBraidotti #theorising #theory

  18. 旋宮圖簡介brief introduction of Hsüan Kung Diagram
    終於,我完成了
    旋宮圖簡介頁面!
    Finally, I have completed the
    brief introduction page of Hsüan Kung Diagram!

    Available in
    漢語, English, 日本語, 㗂越(Tiếng Việtㅤ), 韓國語(한  국  어)·朝鮮語(조  선  어)!

    ​:fox_excited_blur:​ ​:fox_excited_blur:​ ​:fox_excited_blur:​ ​:fox_excited_blur:​ ​:fox_excited_blur:​ ​:fox_excited_blur:​

    #音樂 #樂理 #音樂理論 #中華 #中國音樂 #國樂 #民樂 #中樂 #華樂 #網頁 #編程 #music #musictheory #theory #chinese #chinesemusic #web #webpage #webpages #javascript #html #css #音乐 #乐理 #音乐理论 #中华 #中国音乐 #国乐 #民乐 #中乐 #华乐 #网页 #编程 #音楽 #中国 #旋宮圖 #旋宫图 #âmnhạc #amnhac #trungquoc #중국 #음악

  19. New water filter at work. You choose your temp, place your cup, then put your hand over a sensor to start the water and it plays a chime, let's say a high "G" (g6). When you uncover the sensor to stop the flow, it makes another tone. Which do you think it is? Vote below -
    #music #notation #tonal #intervals #theory #notes #treble #bass #clef #alto #soprano #tenor #piano #bells #tuned #percussion #chime #musical #water #filter at #work #today

  20. ERDAL ARIKAN WAS born in 1958 and grew up in Western Turkey, the son of a doctor and a homemaker.

    He loved science.

    When he was a teenager, his father remarked that, in his profession, two plus two did not always equal four.

    This fuzziness disturbed young Erdal; he decided against a career in medicine. He found comfort in engineering and the certainty of its mathematical outcomes.

    “I like things that have some precision,” he says. “You do calculations and things turn out as you calculate it.”

    Arıkan entered the electrical engineering program at Middle East Technical University. But in 1977, partway through his first year, the country was gripped by political violence, and students boycotted the university.

    Arıkan wanted to study, and because of his excellent test scores he managed to transfer to #CalTech, one of the world's top science-oriented institutions, in Pasadena, California.

    He found the US to be a strange and wonderful country. Within his first few days, he was in an orientation session addressed by legendary physicist #Richard #Feynman. It was like being blessed by a saint.

    Arıkan devoured his courses, especially in #information #theory.

    The field was still young, launched in 1948 by #Claude #Shannon, who wrote its seminal paper while he was at Bell Labs;
    he would later become a revered MIT professor.

    Shannon's achievement was to understand how the hitherto fuzzy concept of information could be quantified, creating a discipline that expanded the view of communication and data storage.

    By publishing a general mathematical theory of information
    —almost as if Einstein had invented physics and come up with relativity in one swoop
    —Shannon set a foundation for the internet, mobile communications, and everything else in the digital age.

    The subject fascinated Arıkan, who chose #MIT for graduate studies.

    There was one reason: “#Bob #Gallager was there,” he says.

    Robert Gallager had written the textbook on information theory. He had also been mentored by Shannon's successor.

    In the metrics of the field, that put him two steps from God.

    “So I said, if I am going to do information theory,” Arıkan says, “MIT is the place to go.”

    By the time Arıkan arrived at MIT, in 1981, Gallager had shifted his focus and was concentrating on how data networks operated.

    Arıkan was trembling when he went to Gallager's office for the first time. The professor gave him a paper about packet radio networks.

    “I was pushing him to move from strict information theory to looking at network problems,” Gallager says.

    “It was becoming very obvious to everyone that sending data from one place to another was not the whole story
    —you really had to have a system.”

    #Guo #Ping #Huawei #Ren #Zhengfei #gold #medal #honored #guest #Erdal #Arıkan #5G #technology #daughter