[Air-l] on journals ...

[James Whyte]

William,
   
  A major problem with with the inter/cross/trans disciplinarity boundaries is that all carry with them the requirement for reconciling the differences in perspective, vocabulary and methodology. Absent this reconciliation you get boundary disputes and inherent confilct.
   
  IMHO this is the souce of most of the conflicts that have occured on this list. That having been said, scholars are invested in ideas and are trained to appreciate them as the capital of their careers.
   
  The discussions about publication is to some extent about making that capital have a value as recognized by the balance of the scholarly community. Ideally it should make no difference where a good idea is published, however, we all know that it is not true. In the real world a good idea posted on a blog, even when indexed, does not carry the same value as an article published in a Thomson ISI organ.
   
  Papers that are written in the spirit of inter/cross/trans disciplinarity face the additional problem of being refereed by an audience that may not appreciate value of this perspective. In fact it is hard to find scholars who espouse inter/cross/trans disciplinarity who have taken the time to truly understand what they are embracing.
   
  IMHO If an organization is to be inter/cross/trans it must have tolerence for a high degree of boundary and interpersonal disputes. A task made more difficult if key players have a personal need to be recognized for their authority.
   
  IMHO disciplinarity conducted in parallel does lttle to reduce these boundary disputes. IMHO inter/cross/trans disciplinarity carries with it a responsibilty of intellectual tolerance and the recognition that disciplinarity may be inevitable consequence of complexity.
   
   
  James
   
  

William Bain <willronb at yahoo.com> wrote:

Personally, I don't see it as unbounded diversity. Or rather, different disciplines
are being applied in the context of (associating) internet research. As the
Internet increasingly makes available (or even becomes) library materials,
research in philosophy (which is what it all is anyway, tho phil branches), in
psychology, in anthropology, etc. could be done using internet research 
methodologies. These would be based/developed on/in internet research associations'/ societies'/groups' theories/methodologies/approaches. This is what appears to me to be happening from this side of the computer screen. Your side also seems interesting to me :-) and I think I'm learning more about it. It's the dialectics that make it interesting imho.

Best regards, Bill






William Bain
PhD Student
Comparative Literature
Department of Spanish Philology
Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona

---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
_______________________________________________
The air-l at 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/



       
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
 Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.