This is a little off-topic, given what we’re talking about right now, but I thought it was something some of you might find interesting: “Texts without Context,” from the New York Times, which is essentially an article about a “mash-up” book.
Recent Comments
- Angie on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Cristin on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Ashlee Wolfe on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Angie on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Angie on So, any peer review wrap-up questions? Questions/comments on the wiki?
- Angie on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Steve K. on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Andrea Larsen on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Gloria Shirey on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Gloria Shirey on So, any peer review wrap-up questions? Questions/comments on the wiki?
- Judy Wycoff on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Dave on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
- Ashlee Wolfe on So, any peer review wrap-up questions? Questions/comments on the wiki?
- Cristin on So, any peer review wrap-up questions? Questions/comments on the wiki?
- Cristin on What did you think of the wordpress set up for the class?
Why did Shields misquote the authors to fit his constructions of reality? He had enough material, social constructions, just through these titles. Powerful stuff. I wonder where it comes from exactly.
Seems like Plato is the best place to start because this huge movement and what most of these authors are trying to do is construct a new “digital humanism”.
But there are flaws in our dreamy web worlds while we are building our realities and we have all kinds of Shields type people that manipulate the information.
Interesting article. I think it paints a pretty accurate picture of what humanism (and out of it a utopianism) , participation in developing online culture, social construction changes the values and qualities of people (and quite literally, their words too).
I think there is just too much information out there anymore to really be able to say anything new, rather we say it in a new way or attach it or show it with a new perspective. Or we show it in a way that is different from the way it was originally presented or alongside something that on one thought to put it with. With the web anyone has the potential to post anything and so there is so much that we are seeing that was not seen before now. But i still think that we need to cite where things come from. I would want something of mine that was used cited.
Good point! A old frame, new parts.