By
·
A short animated clip that, if doesn’t embed properly below, is available here.
A short animated clip that, if doesn’t embed properly below, is available here.
Tags:
it’s interesting in that it may not be doing a good job at illustrating the science/dynamics but perhaps that doesn’t matter, maybe we should stop trying to explain causes and focus more on trying to create moods, not sure if that will move more folks but couldn’t hurt to try, any thoughts about how to measure (rather than just asserting/preaching like Latour and co) whether or not more aesthetic approaches are moving things and also getting some sense of what exactly is moving?
http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2016/08/superbugs-sewage-and-scandal-at-rio.html
more on post-fact politics
https://www.theguardian.com/news/audio/2016/jul/22/how-technology-disrupted-the-truth-podcast
I think claims about “post-fact politics” as a recent phenomenon is a bit misleading, if not a trope. The muddled ground between mood and fact (to use the terms above) has a long history. The moniker “post-fact” has more to do, I think, with the limitations of academics (and the limitations they put on themselves) when it comes to what they are up to: http://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=2042
Jeremy J Schmidt 
Leave a reply to dmf Cancel reply