rattus rattus’ blog

Knowledge

modifes

knowledge.

Make knowledge increase choice.

Even promoting Slavoj Zizek is probably bound to lead oneself into the realms of self-contradiction. What helps is that Zizek himself is refreshingly honest and open about being a liar, a human being, yet a “monster” — his words, too.

There is a wonderful documentary film about Slavoj Zizek called “Zizek!” by Astra Taylor, released 2005, which well illustrates Zizek’s playful attitude towards life’s paradoxes and otherwise. Lauded and recommended though rarely shown in cinemas.

I hate writing. … my whole economy of writing is in fact based on an obsessional ritual to avoid the actual act of writing.
— Slavoj Zizek, author of quite a number of books

In a recent discussion about Sustainability and Global Change a student asked a few renowned scientists what we can do if the current unsustainable development may not be stopped or reversed in time. After a bit of discussion the researchers came to the conclusion: Think globally, act locally.

No, I am not criticizing it (I am just lying). I wonder what it means. I am asking what those who dare to answer with this slogan want to say. More so, what do they say? What is it they are demonstrating?

Who were the ones that explained us that global thinking tends to fail miserably? At least, a good number of ecological catastrophes serves as endorsement.

What does thinking globally mean anyway? Is there a global thinking without acting? Is the act of thinking globally a local act?
Whether globally or locally we act and we think in networks of causes and effects. Are local networks less complex than global networks? If so, at what level of complexity may we stop? What is the opposite? If I am to act locally how do I know what is local and what is global? What does acting globally mean? Who decides? And is this decision an act? A local one?

What about recommendations, rules, laws, and limits? Are they global or local? In which contexts do they operate? Who is held responsible?

Of course, I am responsible for my local actions, am I not? Who is responsible for my global thinking? Me, too. That’s what we think. So, why are there laws? What does it mean that I do act in contexts of habits, traditions, ethics, and for instance European laws?

And how comes my actions are bound by the fact that an American company does not care about how their computers are produced by a company in Taiwan both of which my local dealer can’t get hold of even though it entirely broke down yesterday only 3 months after I bought it?

Do you know what the answer is? — Think globally, act locally! And the other way round.

It is easier to pull the trigger
than play guitar.

— El Mariachi in Desperado

I happen to have written some posts about feedback. For the sake of convenience, here is a list and some more:

• The core trouble of feedback (paradoxical feedback)
• Feedback of students (first order feedback)
• Feedback about feedback (second order feedback)
• Your feedback is welcome, too.

Links to recommended sites

• Ten Tips for Giving or Receiving Feedback by Human Resources at MIT
• Getting Feedback, a handout by the UNC Writing Center
• Wikipedia on Feedback in general

Here is one more proof of the fact that I am a liar simply because I am asking for feedback.

If I ask someone for feedback and if I do so honestly, that means I am asking, and I am taking the received feedback for what it is, namely others opinion, their true opinion, then someone could say: No, you are not asking for feedback. Or, one could even say: You are a liar. And, brave as I am, sticking to my promises, I will have to accept it.

This, of course, once more leads straight into a paradox which we all know as the The Liar’s Paradox.

A WYRIWYG questionnaire

If you think that this is a little far-fetched, well, I agree. (You see, I still prefer to ask honestly for feedback.) And then, just recently, I have received a questionnaire which I, for a change, was eager to fill out because I liked the people who had given it to me. But I couldn’t. Many questions were phrased in a way so that it was impossible for me to answer reasonably. And if I did I was sure my answers were to be misunderstood.

Much has changed already.
A lot is going to change soon.

everything changes, everything stays the same
— k knight

And everything is nothing.

If we’re gonna make it through tomorrow
The solution is to make a change today
— Tesla

Let’s change this.

See what science is named after.

Some say science is about truth. It is not about lies. What could science of science be? The truth about no lies? Says who? And do we know that it is the truth? Isn’t science also about questioning and analysis? Hence, what do we know about analysis of analysis?

Science “refers to a system of acquiring knowledge (…) aimed at finding out the truth” (Wikipedia, 2006-03-03). So we assume that knowledge is not truth. Probably that’s why to know is derived from “view”, as are “vision”, “witness” and the German “Wissen”. What do we know about knowledge?

No, not me. I am a liar.
I am trapped in a feedback loop. Please, don’t cut it!