Cristian, Mike, et al: I've been lurking throughout this discussion but Cristian's point has encouraged me to chime in. I like that the ideas of ideology and representation are both now in the conversation. Consider, though, that one approach lets us present (rather than represent) what is understood within a cultural/historical/geographical context and representation while the other lets us view the same from the outside. I'm thinking here from the perspective of ethnographic participant-observation - in my world it becomes an absolute necessity to separate out what we think we see happening in a particular setting from what people within that setting think they are doing. We generally operate out of a philosophical grounding in phenomenological bracketing because it is far to easy for us to conflate these two things when we present our/their actions to others. This has been a great discussion, everyone - I can't wait to see where it goes next! Cheers, Meryl -- J. Meryl Krieger Ph.D., Folklore & Ethnomusicology Adjunct Lecturer, Sociology, Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis Adjunct Instructor, Communications and Life Skills/Humanities, Ivy Tech Community College Piano/Clarinet Teacher, Stafford Music Academy, Bloomington, IN http://www.linkedin.com/in/merylkrieger http://indiana.academia.edu/merylkrieger On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Cristian Berrio Zapata < cristian.berrio@gmail.com> wrote:
Interesting Mike:
Maybe, if we change the word "ideology" for "representation, then we could be more comfortable. Technology as a thinking process that presents solutions to context problems is built on historic, geographic, cultural representations (economy and ideology included of course). Here I am quoting Mumford.
Certain sources, materials, energies, processes and products are preferred by those views (or representations). These views, when made real by the tools and routines produced by technology, create habits. And habits conform in the end, the organizational behavior of a community, an enterprise, a society. Here is Nelson & Winter who I quote.
So technology, with or without consciousness, impose an architecture, an order to action and thought as disciplined bodies create disciplines minds. Here I quote Foucault. In the case of ICT, mind discipline is more evident but it also intends to create a physical order in any society it reaches; a reproduction of its origin.
As societies are complex, this reproduction is not perfect. It is part reproduction and part construction. We are in that spot in our work, trying to understand what is happening. The idea of “global” is embedded into ICT so when it reaches a "community", this clash against the sense of “local”. The small baker shop owner is not interested in selling to the continent, but to his neighborhood. Same clash we have between computer (written language) in communities that are basically oral: they prefer the cellular.
I believe these are the tips that let we brake down the ICT myth, and begin to understand the ICT tool.
-- *Cristian Berrío Zapata* _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/