DISCUSSIONS ON ASSIGNED READINGS

Being able to move fluidly between the languages of computation and those of natural discourse is a defining exercise in intermediation. With practice, you should be able to transcend many of the perceived differences between the humanities and the sciences.

INFORMED

Try to put yourself into the mind of the author. What non-verbal experience is she trying to convey? What is the larger background and context to what she writes? What are her assumptions and expectations? How does she use language and other media to get her points across? It what ways is her use of language both metaphorical and not-metaphorical? Adopt the role of the method actor and apply your new insights to new arguments this person might make in a discussion with the authors of the other assigned readings or topics relevant to the course.

CRITICAL

Always begin your criticism from a thoroughly informed perspective, a perspective that is situated somewhere within the practice complex systems. What makes sense and what does not? How do his arguments and his exposition relate to your own understandings of the material and to others who are involved with complexity, computation and human cultural systems?

IMPLICATIONS

What are the implications of the ideas being discussed when they are considered in comparison and contrast to the ideas of other practitioners in the field? Your discussion should follow the arguments presented in the readings to new implications or conclusions that were not considered by the authors. In other words, I am looking for the ideas that emerge in your mind as a result of your consideration of the authors works. Where are the ideas in the readings headed? How might they change society and culture? How might they change our understandings of ourselves, our pasts, our futures, and our ongoing coadaptation with complexity?