Ältere Veranstaltungen finden Sie im Archiv!
Videoaufnahmen ausgewählter Vorträge und Veranstaltungen finden Sie in unserer Mediathek!
Sensing as a Cooperative Practice
University of Konstanz, Room C-202, September 09–10, 2024
(in cooperation with Collaborative Research Center “Media of Cooperation”
and “The Binational Center of Qualitative Methods”)
Phenomenology has played a crucial role in the development of Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis (EM/CA). When Garfinkel spoke of “misreading” phenomenological authors, such as Merleau-Ponty and Gurwitsch, he implied to transpose their findings into the vicissitudes of actual social practices and to read them as instructions for doing empirical research. Cooperative practices in and across social interaction are therefore at the center of our approach to “sensing bodies” in P-01’s research on the sociology of perception, synesthesia, (technical) mediation, and multi-sensoriality. In this sense, the workshop will cover and combine: a) discussions of our collaborative reading on phenomenology; b) Garfinkel’s “tutorial problems” (such as inverting lenses) from the archive; c) empirical data sessions on tasting and physical therapy; with d) an expert practitioners’ workshop on (self-)massage, TCM, and body therapy, who will guide the participants into practices of sensing bodies with the help of a wooden object (7-star). Food and tasting practices zero in on sensing objects, whilst physical therapy is predominantly concerned with sensing other bodies. However, practices of self-massage relate to sensing one’s own body mediated via a physical object. The workshop will thus chart a first path of connections between the three work-packages of P01: tutorial archive, physical therapy, and a variety of tasting situations. This also contributes to theory discussions on the mediation of cooperative sensing practices in the third funding phase of the CRC more broadly.
Dahlstrom, Dan. 2008. “The intentionality of Passive Experience: Husserl and A Contemporary Debate”. New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy VII (2007): 1-18. URL: https://www.bu.edu/philo/files/2013/09/d-intentionality.pdf.
Meyer, Christian. 2021. “Co-sensoriality, con-sensoriality, and common-sensoriality: The complexities of sensorialities in interaction”. Social Interaction: Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality 4 (3). DOI: 10.7146/si.v4i3.128153.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 2005 [1945, translation 1958]. “The theory of the body is already a theory of perception“ and “Sense Experience”. In: Phenomenology of Perception. (Part II, Chapter 1), 235-282. Taylor and Francis e-Library. URL: https://voidnetwork.gr/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Phenomenology-of-Perception-by-Maurice-Merleau-Ponty.pdf
Moran, Dermot. 2022. “Husserl on Habit, Horizons, and Background”. In: The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy and Implicit Cognition, edited by J. Robert Thompson, 168-181. London, UK; New York, NY: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781003014584-16.
Noë, Alva. 2004. Action in Perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vassiliou, Fotine. 2017. “Perceptual Constitution in Husserl’s Phenomenology: The Primacy of tactual intentionality”. In: The New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy, edited by Daniele De Santis and Emiliano Trizio, 362- 383. Oxon, UK; New York, NY: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315104195.
Donn, Welton. 1982. “Husserl’s Genetic Phenomenology of Perception”. Research in Phenomenology 12: 59-83. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/24654365.
Zahavi, Dan. 2024. “I, You, and We: Beyond Individualism and Collectivism”, Australasian Philosophical Review April: 1–18. DOI: 10.1080/24740500.2024.2302443.
Die Vorstandssitzungen enthalten Berichte, Themenpunkte und Verschiedenes, die für alle SFB Mitglieder öffentlich sind. Personenbezogene Anträge und Finanzen sind nicht öffentlich und werden nach dem öffentlichen Teil besprochen. Webex-Links für Online-Teilnahmen werden am vorherigen Freitag verschickt. Teilnahme vor Ort ist möglich.
Digitale Protokolle des öffentlichen Teils werden über sciebo zur Verfügung gestellt.
Die Vorstandssitzungen enthalten Berichte, Themenpunkte und Verschiedenes, die für alle SFB Mitglieder öffentlich sind. Personenbezogene Anträge und Finanzen sind nicht öffentlich und werden nach dem öffentlichen Teil besprochen. Webex-Links für Online-Teilnahmen werden am vorherigen Freitag verschickt. Teilnahme vor Ort ist möglich.
Digitale Protokolle des öffentlichen Teils werden über sciebo zur Verfügung gestellt.
Abstract: In 1932 Andrei Kolmogorov, under intense pressure from the KGB for his alleged gay relationships with Pavel Aleksandrov, formalized modern probability theory into an engine of radical contingency, thereby ushering in the current era of probabilistic artificial intelligence marked by „hallucinating“ large language models and Bayesian networks. In close reading of the tumultous Soviet history of media and mathematics, this paper offer a contribution to the ongoing theorization of environment media with a few profiles drawn from my current book on the Soviet prehistory of artificial intelligence. In particular, it offers a review of what I am calling „sreda theory,“ or a Russian-language media theory of environments. Snatches of the concept of sreda, or the Russian word for „environment,“ „Wednesday,“ and a near synonym with „medium,“ emerges across a tumultuous early twentieth century of Soviet intellectuals. In addition to the probabilistic fields of Kolmogorov, the notion of sreda emerge centrally in the grounded, yet cosmically writings of Theodosius Dobzhansky on the modern synthesis, Vladimir Vernadsky on the biosphere, and then Yekateryna Yushchenko’s conceptualization of „addressatsia“ (a decade before „pointers“) in early 1950s Kyiv. Ending in radio-controlled robots navigating the aftermath of Chernobyl, this talk traces out a (particularly Soviet-Ukrainian) history of media environments as smart environments, in which artificial intelligence materializes into an uncanny environment. What makes the noosphere, the ses of modern probability theory, the dynamism of statistical population models, and the lethally irradiated reactor four uncanny except their mutual, ambiguous question of life: what relationship, if any, do smart environments have with life as we know it? How might environmental media theorists, with the tragic Soviet annals of smart environments in hand to survey our own era of data-drive surveillance, better critically reclaim and re-envision our own current era of coal-powered artificial intelligence amid the breakneck escalation of climate crises? The paper will conclude with remarks on these and other questions.
Bio: Benjamin Peters is the Mercator Fellow at the University of Siegen in the Fall 2024 as well as the Hazel Rogers Associate Professor of Media Studies at the University of Tulsa (a sister university of the University of Siegen), where he also holds faculty affiliation with the Cyber School and Honors Program. He is also a faculty affiliate at the Information Society Project at Yale Law School. He is currently at work on three book projects: a Soviet prehistory to artificial intelligence from which this talk draws, a cultural history of Russian hackers coauthored with Marijeta Bozovic (Yale Slavic), and a short book of letters to his college-aged child called How to College.
Relaunch des SFB Grafikdesign und Vorstellung der neuen PR Guidelines und Formate
organisiert vom Teilprojekt Ö
In this seminar-style workshop, communication and technology expert Dr. Heather Suzanne Woods invites conversation and collaboration around scholarly and personal investigation of data-sensing domestic environments (sometimes known as smart homes.) Using the introduction and a case study from her recent book Threshold: How Smart Homes Change Us Inside and Out, Woods will guide participants through a discussion on the challenges and benefits of investigating the intersections of digitality, space, and culture, with a particular focus on digital domestic spaces (smart homes). Participants will be invited to imagine how researchers can contribute to finding/building a “smart homeplace,” which Woods playfully poses as the alternative to corporatized, technoliberal smart homes that privilege the pleasure of few digital subjects over the collective wellbeing of the majority.
In this lecture, Dr. Heather Suzanne Woods examines the far-reaching consequences of proliferating domestic data-sensing environments—smart homes—in the United States of America. Drawing on findings from her recent book Threshold: How Smart Homes Change Us Inside and Out, Woods argues that smart homes (literally and figuratively) architect a future in which every moment of every day is mediated by surveillant technologies. Highlighting her extensive fieldwork at smart homes throughout the USA, Woods demonstrates that these data environments (and connected technologies more broadly) are now so ubiquitous that it is difficult to “be outside” of them. Although her book focuses on the domestic sphere, for Woods smart homes are only one point of arrival in the broader context of a new social, political and economic condition called “living in digitality.” Living in digitality names the technoliberal condition in which technology becomes environmental, expansive, and omnipresent. Troubling late-capitalist and neoliberal narratives of user choice and agency, Woods argues that individual agents need not “opt-in” to smart technologies to be affected by them. Partnering with the collective intelligence of the audience, Woods suggests forms of collective action to resist living in digitality—reformatting our technological future for a common good.
The conference “Machine – Body – Space. The Accomplishment and Entanglement of Human and Nun-Human Sensing” will explore the various relationships between machinic and human methods of sensing and sense-making in their practical environments. Digital and networked technologies are increasingly permeating everyday life and practices. This not only applies to forms of communication, navigating and traveling (e.g. on a bicycle in the city or at border control), but increasingly involves bodily and environmental sensor technologies also within people’s living environments. Whether its managing one’s blood sugar, cooking in the kitchen, watching television in the living room, or regulating the solar panels on the roof: sensor-based, domestic technologies are increasingly brought onto the market and get integrated into almost all areas of life – e.g. new generations of voice assistants, which now also capture visual and tactile signals. „Sensing machines“ (Salter 2022) pervade various environments, equipped with an array of sensors that detect diverse physical or chemical attributes. These sensors register and capture attributes like brightness, motion, touch, temperature, and humidity from their surroundings. Thereby, they capture the movements of humans and pets, their habits, information about architecture, furnishings, or consistency of certain materials (e.g. in the kitchen). They enable new kinds of everyday practices and sensory experiences – or transform familiar ones (e.g. cooking and tasting food) – and can play an ambiguous role also in the context of physical dis/abilites and assistance (Meyer/Asbrock 2018).
Sensory technologies not only potentially empower bodies, but also challenge them with new vulnerabilities, inequalities, and frictions. The entanglement of human and machinic sensing appears to be increasing, which reflects a broader trend of intertwining between humans and machines, e. g. in recent developments of communicative AI. Machines are capable of mimicking human behaviors, while in postmodern approaches such as Haraway’s Cyborg Manifesto (1991) humans are often reconceptualized within mechanistic frameworks. Various perspectives on social theory, such as the concept of “human-machine reconfiguration” (Suchman 2007) have highlighted these developments. Approaches range from feminist critique (Haraway 1991) via Actor-Network-Theory and the idea of nonhuman actors (Latour 2007) up to posthumanist perspectives (Barad 2003) and psychological findings about humans who partly conceptualize themselves as computers (Turkle 1995, 30–31). These approaches stand in opposition to essentialist perspectives, which distinguish sharply between humans and machines as an ontological boundary. However, recent sociotechnical inquiry highlights “the simultaneity with which humans and machines are both separated and interconnected” (Lipp/Dickel 2022, 15). Expanded understandings of “interfacing” (Lipp/Dickel 2022) and of “human sense-making practices” (Eisenmann et al. 2023) offer paths for re-examining familiar boundary-work and exploring new connections between humans and machines.
To facilitate such a conceptualization a certain set of theoretical assumptions seems valuable: The activation and processing of senses and sensory systems can be conceptualized as practical “doings”, with which participants indicate to each other in practices whether and ‘what’ they perceive. Accentuated by praxeological perspectives (e.g. Hirschauer 2016), material objects, including machines, can engage in sensory practices. They contribute to sensory processes and exhibit specific machinic states (e.g. by emitting audiovisual cues), thereby actively participating in the practical execution of sensing. A praxeology of perception, grounded in ethnomethodology, hones in on the embodied and interactional dimensions of sensing (Coulter & Parsons 1991; Lynch & Eisenmann 2022, Mondada 2021), to illuminate the characteristics, achievement and display of sensing-and-sensory-practices. In this vein, figurations and conceptualizations of body and space come into play: Linguistic research in multimodality has intensively discussed this relationship (e. g. Streeck/Goodwin 2011) and suggested to conceptualize also space as an “interactive achievement” (Hausendorf 2013).
The conference encourages investigations into the social accomplishment of perception and sensing against the backdrop of sensor technologies. Contributions could focus on the co-constitution of perception in everyday situations, but also in situations of testing, research and self-examination of perception. We seek to explore (among others) the following questions:
We are looking forward to discussing theoretical questions, e. g. on interface/interfacing, multimodality and multisensoriality, as well as methodological approaches, empirical findings and project presentations.
The workshop is funded by the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG) – Collaborative Research Center 1187 “Media of Cooperation” – Project-ID 262513311.
For questions, further information and participation requests, please reach out to Dr. Clemens Eisenmann or Tim Moritz Hector.
References
Barad, Karen. 2003. “Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter”. Signs and Society 28 (3): 801–831. DOI: 10.1086/345321.
Eisenmann, Clemens; Mlynář, Jakub; Turowetz, Jason; Rawls, Anne W. 2023. „‘Machine Down’: Making sense of human-computer interaction – Garfinkel’s early research on ELIZA at MIT in 1967-1968 and its contemporary relevance”. AI & Society 2023. DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01793-z.
Haraway, Donna. 1991. “A Cyborg Manifesto“. In Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, edited by Haraway, Donna. New York, NY: Routledge, 149-182.
Hausendorf, Heiko. 2013. “On the interactive achievement of space – and its possible meanings”. In Space in language and linguistics. Geographical, interactional, and cognitive perspectives, edited by Auer, Peter; Hilpert, Martin; Stukenbrock, Anja; Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. Berlin: de Gruyter, 276–303. DOI: 10.1515/9783110312027.276.
Hirschauer, Stefan. 2016. “Verhalten, Handeln, Interagieren. Zu den mikrosoziologischen Grundlagen der Praxistheorie”. In Praxistheorie. Ein soziologisches Forschungsprogramm, edited by Schäfer, Hilmar. Bielefeld: transcript, 45–67. DOI: 10.1515/9783839424049-003.
Latour, Bruno. 2007. Reassembling the social. An introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lynch, Michael; Eisenmann, Clemens. 2022. “Transposing Gestalt Phenomena from Visual Fields to Practical and Interactional Work: Garfinkel’s and Sacks’ Social Praxeology”. Philosophia Scientiæ 26 (3): 95–122. DOI: 10.4000/philosophiascientiae.3619.
Lipp, Benjamin; Dickel, Sascha. 2022. “Interfacing the human/machine”. Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory 23 (1): 1–19. DOI; 10.1080/1600910X.2021.2012709.
Meyer, Bertolt; Asbrock, Frank. 2018. “Disabled or Cyborg? How Bionics Affect Stereotypes Toward People With Physical Disabilities”. Frontiers in Psychology 9 (2251): 1–13. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02251.
Mondada, Lorenza. 2021. Sensing in Social Interaction. The Taste for Cheese in Gourmet Shops. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/9781108650090.
Salter, Chris. 2022. Sensing Machines: How Sensors Shape Our Everyday Life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/12116.001.0001.
Streeck, Jürgen; Goodwin, Charles; LeBaron, Curtis. 2011. “Embodied Interaction in the Material World: An Introduction”. In Embodied interaction. Language and body in the material world, edited by Streeck, Jürgen; Goodwin, Charles; LeBaron, Curtis. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1-26.
Suchman, Lucy. 2007. Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Action, 2nd Edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511808418.
Turkle, Sherry. 1995. Life on the Screen. Identity in the Age of the Internet. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Alle Informationen und das Anmeldeformular für die Jahreskonferenz 2024 des SFB 1187 „Scaling Sensing – Sensing Publics: Landschaften und Grenzen, Häuser und Körper“ finden Sie ➞hier.
About the conference
The Collaborative Research Center “Media of Co-operation” first annual conference of its third and final funding phase, explores the interplay between sensing and the public. Through the theme “Scaling Sensing – Sensing Publics. Landscapes, and Borders, Homes and Bodies” the conference examines the mutually constitutive dynamics of sensing practices and the publics they shape and are shaped by, through multi-perspective, interdisciplinary approaches to sensing practices in graduated, fragmented, and heterogenous public spheres. How are sensors and sensing practices shaped within different public realms?
The pervasive integration of sensor technologies is fundamentally changing the way we perceive, sense, and produce knowledge. Technological sensors are capable of making their captured data visible and credible in ways human and environmental sensors cannot: they track movement, measure health data, and analyze built and grown environments. Thereby, they influence diverse settings, ranging from landscapes to cities, to homes and bodies. They both enhance and obscure bodily sensorial practices and intervene in their publicity and intersubjectivity. While sensor media might offer solutions to social, political, technological, medical, and environmental challenges, they also raise ethical and political concerns, such as privacy erosion, disconnection between sensory data and sensory experiences, controversial forms of surveillance, and the socio-technical diffusion of prejudices and various forms of bias. Thus, sensor data, their collection, analysis, and integration with other data formats, and within various social practices, groups of people, and institutions are constitutive not only of sensing but also of publicity and publicness. This conference aims to refine our understanding of the relationship between sensing and publics by examining collaboratively constituted sensors, media, and sensations across different research fields. Contributions present case studies from diverse disciplines and foreground practice in their theoretical stance, addressing the interplay between sensing and publics across four key domains:
These four key domains represent different scales of publicness involved in sensing, but also a range of different sociopolitical and environmental contexts in which various forms of socio-technical sensing occur, distributed among multiple actors, including humans, machines, and the environment.
To enhance interdisciplinary dialogue and debate, all contributions should engage with the broader issues of sensing and publicity that guide this conference and address the following questions:
Die Vorstandssitzungen enthalten Berichte, Themenpunkte und Verschiedenes, die für alle SFB Mitglieder öffentlich sind. Personenbezogene Anträge und Finanzen sind nicht öffentlich und werden nach dem öffentlichen Teil besprochen. Webex-Links für Online-Teilnahmen werden am vorherigen Freitag verschickt. Teilnahme vor Ort ist möglich.
Digitale Protokolle des öffentlichen Teils werden über sciebo zur Verfügung gestellt.
Die Vorstandssitzungen enthalten Berichte, Themenpunkte und Verschiedenes, die für alle SFB Mitglieder öffentlich sind. Personenbezogene Anträge und Finanzen sind nicht öffentlich und werden nach dem öffentlichen Teil besprochen. Webex-Links für Online-Teilnahmen werden am vorherigen Freitag verschickt. Teilnahme vor Ort ist möglich.
Digitale Protokolle des öffentlichen Teils werden über sciebo zur Verfügung gestellt.
Die Vorstandssitzungen enthalten Berichte, Themenpunkte und Verschiedenes, die für alle SFB Mitglieder öffentlich sind. Personenbezogene Anträge und Finanzen sind nicht öffentlich und werden nach dem öffentlichen Teil besprochen. Webex-Links für Online-Teilnahmen werden am vorherigen Freitag verschickt. Teilnahme vor Ort ist möglich.
Digitale Protokolle des öffentlichen Teils werden über sciebo zur Verfügung gestellt.
➞ Program
Since the beginning of the CRC 1187 “Media of Cooperation”, materials and methods from the Harold Garfinkel Archive have grounded research and initiated productive discussions for understanding media practices. The work began with an onsite workshop at the Archive in 2016.
For the third phase we are bringing together another group of practicing ethnomethodologists for an onsite workshop to probe that legacy in the light of ongoing ethnographic and archival research. The workshop offers a venue to tackle core issues of the third funding phase in the context of P01 research on the sociology of perception, technical mediation, and multi-sensorial practice(s).
The workshop will scrutinize and further develop the mutually instructive relationship between archival work and ethnographic research, while also considering the Archive as a field site and material reservoir for doing practical research on topics such as instructed action, embodied practice, the interactional construction of sensing and “dis-abilities”, tutorial problems, and “et cetera”.
With contributions by Anne W. Rawls, Michael Lynch, Jakub Mlynář, Jason Turowetz, Philippe Sormani, and Clemens Eisenmann.
The event is primarily planned as an on-site event. To participate, please reach out to Dr. Clemens Eisenmann.
The issue will be launched publicly on 10 July, 2 to 4 pm CEST with some short presentations and the possibility for Q&A and discussion. You can join us either online or in Siegen (Germany).
For registration: https://forms.office.com/e/P5GKbi4Mnt
In this special issue, we turn to ideas of and approaches to critical technical practices (CTPs) as entry points to doing critique and doing things critically in digitally mediated cultures and societies. We explore the pluralisation of ‘critical technical practice’, starting from its early formulations in the context of AI research and development (Agre, 1997a, 1997b) to the many ways in which it has resonated and been taken up by different communities of practice, and in diverse publications and projects. Agre defined CTP as ‘a technical practice for which critical reflection upon the practice is part of the practice itself’ (1997a: XII). Communities of practice who adopted and adapted CTP range from human–computer interaction (HCI) to media art and pedagogy, from science and technology studies (STS) and computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW) to digital humanities, media studies and data studies. This special issue serves as an invitation to (re)consider what it means to use this notion drawing on a wider body of work, including beyond Agre. In this introduction, we review and discuss CTPs according to (1) Agre, (2) indexed research, and (3) contributors to this special issue. We conclude with some questions and considerations for those interested in working with this notion.
The issue features contributions on machine learning, digital methods, art-based interventions, one-click network trouble, web page snapshotting, social media tool-making, sensory media, supercuts, climate futures and more from Tatjana Seitz & Sam Hind; Michael Dieter; Jean-Marie John-Mathews, Robin De Mourat, Donato Ricci & Maxime Crépel; Anders Koed Madsen; Winnie Soon & Pablo Velasco; Mathieu Jacomy & Anders Munk; Jessica Ogden, Edward Summers & Shawn Walker; Urszula Pawlicka-Deger; Simon Hirsbrunner, Michael Tebbe & Claudia Müller-Birn; Bernhard Rieder, Eric Borra & Stijn Peters; Carolin Gerlitz, Fernando van der Vlist & Jason Chao; Daniel Chavez Heras; and Sabine Niederer & Natalia Sanchez Querubin.
Links to the articles, to our living literature collection (Zotero group), and information on the newly created dedicated mailing list can be found here: https://publicdatalab.org/projects/pluralising-critical-technical-practices/.
ausgerichtet von Hoa Mai Tran (B05) und Konstantin Aal (B04)
Im Rahmen der Präsenzwochen laden wir alle SFB-Mitglieder zu „snacks&drinks“ in den Herrengarten ein – stets einmal im Monat am Mittwoch gegen Mittag und frühen Nachmittag. Das Format zielt darauf ab, die Vernetzung zwischen Projekten und (neuen) Kolleg*innen zu verbessern und die Integration neuer SFB-Mitglieder durch ein informelles Beisammensein und die Bereitstellung von Snacks und Getränken zu unterstützen.
Die Vorstandssitzungen enthalten Berichte, Themenpunkte und Verschiedenes, die für alle SFB Mitglieder öffentlich sind. Personenbezogene Anträge und Finanzen sind nicht öffentlich und werden nach dem öffentlichen Teil besprochen. Webex-Links für Online-Teilnahmen werden am vorherigen Freitag verschickt. Teilnahme vor Ort ist möglich.
Digitale Protokolle des öffentlichen Teils werden über sciebo zur Verfügung gestellt.
We will meet online.
Im Mai startete die neue Arbeitsgruppe „Scales of Cooperation“, die dieses Semester eine erste Vortragsreihe zu „Scales of Sovereignty“ organisierte. Mit dem Start der Arbeitsgruppe finden zudem zwei Online-Lektüresitzungen statt, die sich Schlüsseltexten des SFB über Kooperation und Skalierung von Infrastrukturen und Öffentlichkeiten annimmt. Die zweite Sitzung umfasst die folgende Literatur:
main reading material: Callon, Michel; Latour, Bruno (1981): „Unscrewing the Big Leviathan or How Actors Macrostructure Reality and How Sociologists Help Them To Do So?“ in: K. Knorr, A. Cicourel (eds.), Advances in Social Theory and Methodology, Routledge and Kegan Paul, Londres, pp. 277-303.
Die Diskussion findet auf Englisch statt.
27. Juni 2024, 14 bis 19 Uhr und 28. Juni 2024, 9 bis 13 Uhr
Anmeldungsschluss: 31.05.2024 – Vorab: Telefonisches Einzelgespräch zum Bezug auf das je eigene Projekt und Absprache von Materialien.
Ziel dieser Meisterklasse ist es, das experimentelle Herangehen der Kamera-Ethnographie kennenzulernen, sowie ein arrangierendes Forschen (mit Bezug auf Wittgenstein) gemeinsam zu erproben, indem wir auf die Diversität der im Workshop vertretenen Forschungsfelder Bezug zu nehmen. Die Teilnehmenden möchten wir ermuntern, von ihren eigenen Forschungsmaterialien etwas in diese Werkstatt einzubringen.
Filmen als epistemische Praxis
In unserem alltäglichen Mediengebrauch nehmen wir an, mit einer Kamera einfach etwas einfangen und mit anderen teilen zu können. Wenn wir jedoch davon ausgehen, dass das Ziel von Forschung darin besteht, über den Stand des bisher Bekannten und Gesehenen hinauszukommen, dann haben wir es mit epistemischen Dingen zu tun, die zunächst noch nicht sichtbar sind und daher auch nicht einfach mit einer Kamera aufgenommen werden können. Mit dieser Überlegung nimmt Bina E. Mohn, die Begründerin der Kamera-Ethnographie, Bezug auf die wissenschaftssoziologischen Laborstudien der 1980er und 1990er Jahre. Von einer Prämisse des (noch) nicht Sichtbaren auszugehen, markiert die Abkehr von Strategien des Kameragebrauchs, die Sichtbarkeit immer schon voraussetzen. Die Kamera-Ethnographie bietet einen handhabbaren repräsentationskritischen Ansatz auf Grundlage einer situierten Methodologie und kann als ein kontinuierlicher reflexiver Prozess der Arbeit an Sichtbarkeit und Sehen verstanden werden. Kamera-ethnographisch lassen sich auch nonverbale Praktiken und soziomaterielle Konstellationen bestens untersuchen. Darüber hinaus eignet sich die Kamera-Ethnographie besonders für eine Adaption des Formats der „übersichtlichen Darstellung“ (Wittgenstein): Filmische Arrangements dienen in diesem Zusammenhang als Versuch, die Frage zu beantworten, wie soziale Praktiken hier und jetzt und dort und dann gelebt, benannt und verstanden werden können. Für Betrachtende kamera-ethnographischer Veröffentlichungen bietet sich damit die Chance, Unerwartetes über die Vielfalt und Möglichkeit sozialer Phänomene und Praktiken zu entdecken.
Das grundlegende Buch von Bina E. Mohn „Kamera-Ethnographie. Ethnographische Forschung im Modus des Zeigens. Programmatik und Praxis“ ist im Jahr 2023 erschienen, open Access zugänglich und liegt dieser Meisterklasse zugrunde. Wichtige Referenzen des kamera-ethnographischen Ansatzes sind u.a. Bruno Latour (science-in-the-making), Karin Knorr-Cetina (epistemische Kulturen), Hans-Jörg Rheinberger (Experimentalsysteme), Clifford Geertz („thick description“), Ludwig Wittgenstein (Sprachspiele und „übersichtliche Darstellung“) und Karen Barad (agential realism und intra-action).
Teilnahmevoraussetzungen
Anmeldung zur Meisterklasse
Kontakt und Anmeldung: wiesemann@erz-wiss.uni-siegen.de
Anmeldungsschluss: 31.05.2024. Bis zum 07.06.2024 wird die Teilnahme durch die Veranstaltenden verbindlich bestätigt. Bitte bei der Anmeldung kurz auf diese Fragen eingehen:
Hierzu trifft Bina telefonisch gern noch genauere Absprachen mit jedem einzeln.
Digitale Politik und postdigitale Souveränität: Zwischen Technokratie, Öffentlichkeit und medialer Kontrolle?
15.05.24 | 4.15-5.45 PM | Hybrid
Vortrag von Prof. Dr. Stephan Packard (Universität zu Köln)
The Double Alignment Problem – On the Transfer of Sovereignty between Humans and AI
28.05.24 | 4.15-5.45 PM | Hybrid
Vortrag von Prof. Dr. Roberto Simanowski
The Double Alignment Problem Continued (Teil der Werkstatt Medienpraxistheorie)
29.05.24 | 10.00-11.30 AM | Hybrid
Workshop mit Prof. Dr. Roberto Simanowski
The Semi-Souvereign Fifth Estate
12.06.24 | 4.15-5.45 PM | Hybrid
Vortrag von Prof. Dr. William Dutton (Michigan State University)
Regulating Sovereignty in Cyberspace
29.05.24 26.06.24 (neuer Termin) 4.15-5.45 PM | Hybrid
Vortrag von Prof. Dr. Yik Chan Chin (Beijing Normal University)
Im Mai startete die neue Arbeitsgruppe „Scales of Cooperation“, die dieses Semester eine erste Vortragsreihe zu „Scales of Sovereignty“ organisierte. Mit dem Start der Arbeitsgruppe finden zudem zwei Online-Lektüresitzungen statt, die sich Schlüsseltexten des SFB über Kooperation und Skalierung von Infrastrukturen und Öffentlichkeiten annimmt. Die erste Sitzung umfasst die folgende Literatur:
reading material: Schüttpelz Erhard (2017): „Infrastructural Media and Public Media“ in: Media in Action 1(1): 13–61.
There is on-going public criticism and concern around practices and techniques of identification on digital media and the mass collection of personal data by platforms. But what is ‚digital identity‘ and how is it mutually produced by digital companies and legal regulations?
The workshop is intended to address legal issues relating to targeted advertising and, in particular, the question of when data used for advertising purposes loses its personal relation (Art. 4 No. 1 GDPR), i.e. becomes anonymous, so that the GDPR no longer applies to it.
Civil identity includes data such as name, home address, date of birth and other classic markers. For the advertising industry, however, other identity-forming factors are more important, such as income, hobbies/interests, approximate residential area, mobility data or data about users‘ end devices. Against this background, the question arises as to when data relating to such a „digital identity“ loses its personal reference to the extent that it is considered anonymized.
10:00 – 10:15 Welcome
10:15 – 11:30 Maximilian Becker and Leonie Bültmann: Personal Data and the Boundaries of Anonymity
11:45 – 13:00 Jann Cornels: The European Court of Justice (ECJ) Ruling on the Interactive
Advertising Bureau (IAB) Europe and its Consequences for Targeted Advertising
13:00 – 14:30 Lunch
14:30 – 16:00 Elisabeth Niekrenz: Real-Time Bidding: Current Technical Developments and Litigation Challenges
16:15 – 17:30 Annalisa Pelizza: Towards a Translational Approach to Identification: The Art of Choosing the Right Spokespersons at the Securitized Border
17:30 – 18:00 Closing Discussion
ausgerichtet von Kevin Onland (A03/Z) und Max Kanderske (A03)
Im Rahmen der Präsenzwochen laden wir alle SFB-Mitglieder zu „snacks&drinks“ in den Herrengarten ein – stets einmal im Monat am Mittwoch gegen Mittag und frühen Nachmittag. Das Format zielt darauf ab, die Vernetzung zwischen Projekten und (neuen) Kolleg*innen zu verbessern und die Integration neuer SFB-Mitglieder durch ein informelles Beisammensein und die Bereitstellung von Snacks und Getränken zu unterstützen.
Digitale Politik und postdigitale Souveränität: Zwischen Technokratie, Öffentlichkeit und medialer Kontrolle?
15.05.24 | 4.15-5.45 PM | Hybrid
Vortrag von Prof. Dr. Stephan Packard (Universität zu Köln)
The Double Alignment Problem – On the Transfer of Sovereignty between Humans and AI
28.05.24 | 4.15-5.45 PM | Hybrid
Vortrag von Prof. Dr. Roberto Simanowski
The Double Alignment Problem Continued (Teil der Werkstatt Medienpraxistheorie)
29.05.24 | 10.00-11.30 AM | Hybrid
Workshop mit Prof. Dr. Roberto Simanowski
The Semi-Souvereign Fifth Estate
12.06.24 | 4.15-5.45 PM | Hybrid
Vortrag von Prof. Dr. William Dutton (Michigan State University)
Regulating Sovereignty in Cyberspace
29.05.24 26.06.24 (neuer Termin) | 4.15-5.45 PM | Hybrid
Vortrag von Prof. Dr. Yik Chan Chin (Beijing Normal University)
14:15 – 15:00
Marcus Burkhardt, Max Becker und Yarden Skop (A07)
Personal Data Industry
15:00 – 15:45
Miglè Bareikyte (P06)
War Sensing