Skip to main content
punctum books

Paradigm Change/ Institute Change

Chapter of: Burn after Reading: Vol. 1, Miniature Manifestos for a Post/medieval Studies + Vol. 2, The Future We Want: A Collaboration(pp. 145–155)

Export Metadata

  • ONIX 3.1
    Cannot generate record: No publications supplied
  • ONIX 3.0
    • Thoth
      Cannot generate record: No publications supplied
    • Project MUSE
      Cannot generate record: No BIC or BISAC subject code
    • OAPEN
      Cannot generate record: Missing PDF URL
    • JSTOR
      Cannot generate record: No BISAC subject code
    • Google Books
      Cannot generate record: No BIC, BISAC or LCC subject code
    • OverDrive
      Cannot generate record: No priced EPUB or PDF URL
  • ONIX 2.1
    • EBSCO Host
      Cannot generate record: No PDF or EPUB URL
    • ProQuest Ebrary
      Cannot generate record: No PDF or EPUB URL
  • CSV
  • JSON
  • OCLC KBART
  • BibTeX
  • CrossRef DOI deposit
    Cannot generate record: This work does not have any ISBNs
  • MARC 21 Record
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 Markup
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 XML
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
Metadata
TitleParadigm Change/ Institute Change
ContributorL.O. Aranye Fradenburg (author)
Eileen A. Joy(author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.21983/P3.0067.1.27
Landing pagehttps://punctumbooks.com/titles/burn-after-reading/
Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
CopyrightFradenburg, L.O. Aranye; Joy, Eileen A.
Publisherpunctum books
Published on2014-04-28
Long abstractWe are in the midst of paradigm change, brought on by initiatives like biological systems theory, post-structuralism, James Gibson’s theory of affordances,1 and neuroplasticity.Top-down or prime-mover models of change have given way to principles of creative interactivity and causal pari-ty, in which concentrations of forces and systemic ele-ments continue to play significant roles, but only as parts of turbulent, non-totalizable assemblages. The findings of the genome project have put genetic determinism in doubt. Today’s genes do not write the scripts of our lives; they are relatively passive elements in a complex field of biochem-ical interactions. Jesper Hoffmeyer summarizes the situation this way: “Living cells . . . use DNA to construct the organ-ism, not vice versa.”2 Many kinds of conjunctions and symbioses now appear to have significance for bio-his-tory; these are evolutionary events that depend neither on natural selection nor mutation. The study of multi-cell-ularity shows that individuation and aggregation are both fundamental to living process, and are interdependent ra-ther than mutually exclusive processes. Focus on the ac-tions of cells has restored the importance of the life expe-rience of the organism and its forms of relationality to evolutionary theory; bio-history is now seen to be created by mutually constitutive interactions between the geno-type, the phenotype, and environmental, including social, affordances. The organism is no longer a “dead end,” and evolution turns out to be a history of ecologies rather than of anthropomorphized “selfish” genes bent on self-repli-cation. Semiosis—communication—is a sine qua non of living process. The brain’s capacity for estimation and signal-interpretation is, simply, vital; only in very specific knowledge-ecologies does it require probability theory and experimental controls to act on behalf of sentient experi-ence. Living process—including artful, real-time, improvi-sational activity—finally plays a significant role in bio-historiography.
Page rangepp. 145–155
Print length11 pages
LanguageEnglish (Original)