evolutionary bibliology
This emergence of symbolic thought was not indicated by the course of human evolution. Although hominid brain was successfully dedicated to complex skills and behaviors these were not predictive of the advent of symbolic thought. This unexpected emergence added a layer of consciousness and a medium of communication unique in the biological world.
The earliest symbolic expression is cave art. A much later expression is the book. These expressions provide proof of the course of symbolic thought and conceptual works. Another symbolic expression is the network of electronic communication, screen reading and digital research. Advocates contend that these developments, again out of context with biological evolution, will propel our species to new utilizations of the human mind. They contend that these augmentations of intelligence will only sharpen and extend a progressive cultural evolution.
Are we sure? Perhaps cultural evolution can mimic the mechanistic role of biological evolution and atrophy toward more instinctual behavior. The added layer of consciousness dedicated to symbolic interpretation may not be inherently stable; it was bizarre to begin with. Computer assistance of symbolic thought may track off in various directions.
digital humanities
“We are increasingly able to interact with texts in novel ways, as linguistic, visual, and statistical processing provide us with new modes of reading, representation, and understanding. This shift makes evident the necessity for humanities scholars to enter into a dialogue with librarians and computer scientists to understand the new language of open standards, search queries, visualization and social networks.”
The University of Chicago
conference theme is narrated by Gregory Crane with the title,
What Do You Do with a Million Books? Surprisingly the University has already
answered the humanist’s question.
It is remarked that younger students have difficulty distinguishing between authorship and plagiarism. They copy content from on-line sources as their own. But what if half their brain is literally out on the web? If so, why should they distinguish internal from external conceptualization? The quicker the search, the smarter the student. It makes no difference if the neural system is bionic or electronic.
This is not an issue of artificial intelligence, but the artificiation of bionic intelligence. At the University of Chicago they know the difference as their plan to build the largest new book library of the 21st century indicates.
(e)mail art
Join
Umbrella On-line for the latest news and review of distributed paper art. Experience the tension of one art genre conveyed by another.
loony tunes
îBut more importantly, books themselves will transition from a product to an experience. As books change in form from simple ìwords on a pageî to various digital manifestations of the information, future books will be reviewed and evaluated by the experience they create.”
Futurists are disregarded for good reasons. In the
above instance the future of the book is predicted to be nothing different than what it has always been. Futurists predict change as a continuous process and disregard both the inherent stabilities of the sector examined as well as stabilities renewed in the context of change. The idea that sectors such as libraries or works such as encyclopedias are constantly in flux is loony. It is especially loony when a timeless dynamic is construed as sudden change.
oh, but one can never have too many links!
“In many cases, the introductory essays which I was sent to critique were so heavily weighted, even in mid-sentence, with in-text citation that the entire experience of processing text and enjoying text was completely compromised. By the time, e.g., a reader reached the end of most sentences, the sentence flow had
been so interrupted by internal citation that the end result was text fatigue and annoyance, not comprehension — certainly not satisfaction. We all appreciate the need for close documentation, but when a reader’s attention and patience are tested by this sort of editorial practice, the entire reading process takes a rather big hit; so does the achievement of the author’s writing, especially if it’s quite good writing; so does the aesthetic value (the ‘look’) of the printed page.” Maureen E. Mulvihill
Princeton Research Forum (posted here from the
SHARP listserv without permission)