Difference between revisions of "Transdisciplinarity—The Future of Academia"
m |
m |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | <center><h2><b>H O L O T O P I A</b></h2></center><br><br> | + | <center><h2><b>H O L O T O P I A P R O T O T Y P E</b></h2></center><br><br> |
<div class="page-header" ><h1>Transdisciplinarity—The Future of Academia</h1></div> | <div class="page-header" ><h1>Transdisciplinarity—The Future of Academia</h1></div> | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
| − | <div class="page-header" ><h2> | + | <div class="page-header" ><h2>Federation</h2></div> |
<div class="row"> | <div class="row"> | ||
Latest revision as of 19:07, 12 April 2020
Contents
H O L O T O P I A P R O T O T Y P E
Transdisciplinarity—The Future of Academia
Pitch
The stage has here been set for a most timely self-reflective dialog.
Scope
We look at the big 'algorithm'—the way in which the selected, specially trained, and publicly sponsored thinkers are organized in the production and dissemination of knowledge. In the moment of our history where the humanity's very future may depend on new thinking.
Can we have the good sense to overcome this evolutionary pitfall, and continue the evolution, as Galilei and our other great predecessors did in their time? Can we follow the direction pointed to by the available knowledge of knowledge, and give our society the kind of information it needs? And before all and most importantly—the information about information it needs?
View
Have our education system, our ethics, our attitude toward systems, our information technology, our epistemology, and our disciplinary organization of knowledge work conspired to create an ecology where the homo ludens academicus prospers?
Federation
Stories
Story 1
Text
I M A G E
Caption
Story 2
Text
I M A G E
Caption
Actions
Action 1
Text
Action 2
Text
Back to Five insights