Archive for July, 2006
July 20, 2006 at 2:53 am · Filed under Uncategorized
Have you ever wondered what the difference is between interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and transdisciplinary is?
“Multidisciplinarity, cross-disciplinarity, transdisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity are terms
that are often used interchangeably. However, in the professional literature for
interdisciplinarians, they have different meanings.”
–Wolfe and Haynes, Interdisciplinary Writing Assessment Profiles, p30.
Wolfe and Haynes describe the differences and set up assessment strategies for differentiating between them in writing and research.
July 19, 2006 at 3:11 am · Filed under Uncategorized
Museum Exhibits Show How Artists Used Animals to Explain the Natural World – New York Times
How do artists convey empathy and other points of view?
How do scieentists ‘get a feeling for the organism’?
July 15, 2006 at 10:46 am · Filed under Uncategorized
RBM Online – Ethics, Science and Moral Philosophy of Assisted Human Reproduction (Volume 10, supplement 1, 2005) – Contents
If you’re looking for information to bring into a discussion about whether life begins at conception or not, take a look at the M. Ko’s article:
“Recent advances in the systematic molecular analysis of preimplantation embryos are summarized, including the molecular identification of nearly all genes involved in preimplantation development and their detailed expression patterns. Notwithstanding a quantum leap in molecular understanding of preimplantation embryos, molecular evidence seems to provide no decisive definition of a threshold for the beginning of human life during preimplantation development.”
Despite attempts to legislate otherwise, perhaps one conclusion we can draw from this is that life never begins per se- it only continues…..
July 15, 2006 at 9:35 am · Filed under Uncategorized
This is a bacterial sensor that was developed to behave much photographic film. The light that strikes it causes a reaction which then produces a color shift in the affected areas.
Featured Parts (in the registry of ‘standard’ biological “parts” at MIT: Light Sensor
This is a coliroid portait of Andy Ellington. You can compare it with the real Andy. Image courtesy of UT/UCSF.
Compare this to “Mother and Child” by Heather Ackroyd and Dan Harvey who used a strain of grass that carried a mutation that kept it from fading and losing an image when exposed. The techniques they used to “fix” the grass for photographic purposes were developed in collaboration with plant biologists.
There are a few significant differences between “Mother and Child” and the coliroid above.
The coliroid is definitely synthetic, engineered by people to perform a specific function. The grass image was likely developed through artificial selection to maintain the lines of grass which carried the mutation. The mutation may have been induced with UV or some other mutagen, but this is a different process from building a specific function into an organism more or les from scratch.
Both of these images are made using a gigantic population of individuals- plants or bacteria, yet these populations are probably clonally reproducing- meaning the individuals are very similar. “Mother and Child” is a very large image- about 3ft x 5ft when hanging on a wall. The coliroids tend to be small- about the size of a petri dish- though they have a resolution of approximately 100 megapixels per square inch.
Both techniques employ the use of another organism to realize their images. How will these new kinds of photography affect these organisms, or rather how will they affect us?
July 2, 2006 at 8:28 pm · Filed under Uncategorized
ZCD sent me this article the other day. It’s provided a framework for understanding the goals of my design intuitions. What does design mean when it incorporates many perspectives and balances the integrity of all knowledge forms in its “network.” By network I mean all of those involved in a designed object’s creation, production, distribution, etc. (e.g. HowStuffIsMade)
Here’s a summary of cognitive justice from Maja van der Velden
Here’s the link zack sent:
http://www.chet.org.za/oldsite/debates/19990407report.html
I’m not sure I agree that each form of knowledge should be treated exactly equal in this model. My sense is that a negative frequency-dependent model could better maintain the diversity of knowledge bases over the long-term. I haven’t compared coexistence models yet for exactly equal proportions of perspectives, but I’d imaging that as soon as one gains an advantage their is little incentive to maintain that equal proportion. These are my first thoughts.
« Previous entries
