Naming & "The New Literacy of Ideas"

The New Literacy of Ideas is a combination of two names I've been toying with. The first is actually a question, asking what is an idea? and the second was my "serious" name-- New Media Literacy.

Neither name is perfect, nor is the synthesis I've created. But I think it frames the issue I'm contending with rather nicely. New Media Literacy, albeit cliché, directly addressed the issue of scope-- asking what precisely literacy means in today's social environment. Yet the words "media" and "literacy" seem almost antithetical. To read more about this issue, check out Lewis Lapham's article "How the Lively Arts became The Media".

"What is an idea?" Obviously isn't a proper name for a major, but it gets to the heart of the question I'm asking, which is, quite simplistically, WHERE DOES THIS WORD COME FROM? As I've continued to refine the question, I've managed to give it more specificity and direction. I've begun to ask "What do we talk about when we talk about ideas?"

So what do we talk about when we talk about ideas? Well, here's where it all comes together: we talk about literacy. We talk about knowledge, and the future. Ideas are hopeful, Ideas are personal, and Ideas, perhaps most essentially, never die.

So here I am, with my [current] title: New Literacy of Ideas. It's not perfect, like much of what goes on here but it is an attempt to frame the many different issues at work, and ultimately keep it all categorized under this strangely peculiar and patterned word: idea.

Thanks to everyone who has supported me so far, and to all those who have pushed me even further. I hope I know what to do next, but I also know that hope will guide me to do the right thing.

A strategy for categorizing ideas?

Lately I've been struggling with the various ways I can organize and categorize ideas- a couple solutions stand out as useful (from ideology to idealism, etymologies, usages, etc.) but I think I may have found the answer I've been really looking for:

Perhaps the words I'm looking for are "discursive" and "recursive" as in "discursive ideas" and "recursive ideas"-

Discursive ideas depend on language and the concept of an idea, they jump around chaotically, leaving marks across the mental spectrum, whereas recursive ideas are constantly kept in check by their own content.

This may solve the question of categorization, but I still have a number of barriers to get over before I can properly illustrate and visualize ideas. However there's forward movement on all fronts; one of the ways I could visualize an idea is as an "atom-" making the proton (the central, huge mass) "concepts" and the electrons (the perhaps mass-less tiny orbitals that decide the chemical properties of an atom) "theories"- this is one strategy among many.

Now I need to begin making the system I've designed operate properly; I've already begun putting ideas into the tumblr (natureofideas.tumblr.com) but now I need to start organizing them and picking out larger concepts I can follow. Next I'll need to look at the relationship between concepts and theories and figure out where exactly they fit in the spectrum of ideas.

A Silent War Between Humanists and Scientists?

Went to see Flip Phillips' talk this evening about how he became... well, how he combined interests in music, architecture, animation, and science into a singular career and found a path that let him study what he loves.

Flip postulated that there are ongoing arguments between the ideological bases of humanism and science. I found this fascinating because I've spent a lot of time this semester studying humanism only to find that for every layer I uncover, another more esoteric one appears.

Humanism seems to abhor a definition. Science, ignoring the issue, dedicates itself to knowledge building via the scientific method. Can one of these possibly be right, though? Obviously the answer is that there is common ground, but I would like to push back and suggest this rift represents a glitch, rather than an argument. Scientists should be humanists, and humanists should be scientists. So what's wrong?

Yesterday, my friend Mimi offhandedly remarked that science is "God's logic-" regardless of the accuracy of this claim, I thought it made an interesting point- that there are multiple angles to approach ideas from, and that perhaps there really is a silent war on between those who leave the figuring up to God, and those who demand that they have ultimate authority over all knowledge entering their heads.

More to come on this issue, but until then I've asked Flip for a meeting where I'll get his perspective on these tricky things called ideas.

Progress As Of February 17th 2010

I'm posting this to bring order to the chaos of the past few days. My self-determined major has gone from a theory to something viable and exciting. I'm now beginning to solidify a number of variables that hopefully will lead to approval.

At this point, only a few obstacles are still in the way. I will approach them with care and subtlety because I believe that they mustn't just be completed, but instead should be carefully constructed to create a pathway as flexible as it is reliable.

The most exciting news is that two faculty members have signed on to advise me. I'm excited to include them in this project and look forward to many useful advisings from them as I continue down this path.

The first to sign on is Susannah Mintz, Associate Chair of the English Department at Skidmore College and a person who's dedication to rigor and close reading of text will be more beneficial than I can rightly gauge this early on.

http://cms.skidmore.edu/english/faculty/mintz.cfm

The second is Erica Bastress-Dukehart of the History Department at Skidmore College. As I find myself delving deeper and deeper into the historical aspects of an idea she has pushed and inspired me to push for rigorous historical accuracy. If I can say that I think I know how Professor Mintz will help me, I cannot rightfully say that I know how Professor Bastress-Dukehart will - this is why she is such a welcomed addition to my fledgling project.

http://www.skidmore.edu/~bastress/

The deadline is March 15th as of right now. A thousand thank you's to everyone who has seen potential within this area of study and has given me their confidence and respect. More updates to come.