Home

`Schools of Thought’ Survey (in the Arts / Humanities / Communication)

So, a question of Epistemology, or: How do you know, what you know? *

What is epistemology? Below is one perspective.

Sir Karl Popper writes about (evolutionary) epistemology in Conjectures and Refutations (Popper 1963), among other places. As the evocritic Prof Brian Boyd (author of the monumental On The Origin of Stories, 2009) and also international Vladimir Nabokov expert and longtime Sir Karl R. Popper biographer has noted, probably the best `short summary’ of Popper’s theories on Epistemology (or, How we know, what we know) are the introduction in Conjectures & Refutations (1963), “On The Sources of Knowledge and Ignorance”. (See; Popper’s `ten theses’ in there.)

Epistemology - How do we know what we know?

Epistemology – How do we know, what we know?

And so, with all that (Popper’s Evolutionary Epistemology) in mind,  I’ve also recently been working on an idea for a Survey, on `Schools of Thought in the Arts/Humanities/Communication‘.

Screenwriting books

And, my thanks to the very many helpful professors/academics who have already helped with feedback, ideas, suggestions and information for the proposed Survey’s design, including (but not limited to): Professors Brian Boyd, Ian W. Macdonald, Dean Keith Simonton, and, many others.

Notably – if it is going to be published academically, I will first need to get Ethics Clearance to do this survey/study, and will also need to ensure that the actual Survey Design is optimized, before conducting the actual survey itself.

But with all that in mind, here is the draft survey design. Please note – it is a work-in-progress…

`Schools of Thought’ Survey-Form (Draft): 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/100-9OZ92Rsoy8VzWHX8w4RQGoj7eTkV1ovFkVwsEX3g/viewform

If you (and by `you’ I mean, anyone) have any suggestions/feedback on the Survey Design, please do add them as a Comment, to this blog-post, below. (You could of course also email me if for some reason you don’t want to make a Comment public on this blog, but, if you email me, (I get a lot of emails) I also may forget to thank you, later. So; a Comment here is just more easy to find. Also, I don’t even really need to thank you then as everyone can see your comment/suggestion below, and we can assume that I also saw it, etc. I will try and thank everyone, but I can already foresee that I may forget to thank some people, and I really want to avoid that problem. It’s always better to thank people than not thank people when they contribute to something. Appreciation is important. Then again, praise can be embarrassing. There’s a fine line.)

FAQ:

Q: Why does the (draft) `Schools of Thought’ Survey start with the Questions on: favourite creative artifacts (novels, films, etc)?

A: (1) That information might also be good for everyone to know; (2) It also makes it more interesting for the survey participant; and also, (3) I don’t know of a recent survey / study on that, so, why not ask it in the survey, as well.

Q: Where did you get your `list’ of 50 (or so) `Schools of Thought’ in the survey form, from?

A: From many many places/sources. (And, from many suggestions, from some very helpful academics and scholars!)

Q: But – you have `missed’ some crucial `Schools of Thought’ in your list-!

A: Yes. That’s what the Survey is also intending to capture. (See: the `Other’ field, where you can add other Schools that are missing from the list.) It will be good to publish a `big list of Schools’, once it is collated. If you know of another `big list’ of current Schools of Thought that is online (and thus, more readily accessible than say in a printed book, which not everyone may have access to or actually read), then, please do let me know.

Part of the (creative) problem here is that, people in academia (and also, outside it) keep on thinking, and thus coming up with new ideas / Schools of Thought, due to: Creativity. But – this is actually a very good problem to have, i.e. In general, Creativity is a good thing. But, see also: Csikszentmihalyi (1996) (on “the axe-maker’s gift” in creativity). I would also highly recommend Creativity (Csikszentmihalyi 1996) regardless of the axe-maker’s gift. But the axe-maker’s gift is also important in regard to “the dark side of Creativity”, on which quite a bit of research has been done, but, for reasons of brevity, this is not the place to talk about that.

Q: Why the Questions at the end of the survey, on: Creativity?

A: If you look at the scientific study of Creativity (from the domains of Psychology and Sociology), most of these Schools of Thought listed in the survey are considered `big-C’ Creative by the field. (Or, have been considered Creative by many in the field, at certain points in time. Some of these `Schools’ are also controversial, and/or have fallen out of fashion, over time. But, that is also the process of critical rationalism – and, evolutionary epistemology – for more (if `The Growth of Knowledge’ is of interest) see: Karl Popper (1963-1999), DT Campbell (1960, 1965), DK Simonton (1999, 2010) and also Nathalie Gontier (2006), for more… see also the References, below for more specifics) See also, the very interesting book Agnotology: The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance (Proctor & Schiebinger 2008)

Q: Why even try and measure how `Schools of Thought’ change over time, with a Survey, such as this? 

A: I am interested in: Bio-Cultural Evolution (see: Csikszentmihalyi & Massimini 1985). And, in Epistemology. i.e.: Where do (good, i.e. big-C Creative) ideas come from? Why do some ideas spread further, in culture? (i.e. And – How do we know, what we know?)

Q: Why don’t you `split the survey up’, into four x separate surveys: e.g.: (1) Schools of Thought, (2) Favourite Creative artifacts, (3) On Creativity, and also, (4) Important Issues in Arts/Humanities/Communication study …?

A: Great point. I have considered doing that; but there is also a `cost-benefit trade-off’ in having all four topics in the one survey form. – It would appear that (1) These four areas are all intimately connected, and also, (2) People in general tend to be resistant to `doing surveys’ in general, and so – if they only have to do one survey (even if, it is four times as long as four shorter surveys) then it appears they are more likely to do it, than four different (but, shorter) surveys.

Q: Can I take the survey (online), right now?

A: Yes, you can, (and, many people already have done so) as, the Survey form itself is `live’ – (and is anonymous) – but, the test-survey results so far (during the initial alpha-test/`Survey Design’ phase) most likely won’t be published. As of March 2015, it’s still currently a draft version of the survey design/form. But – any feedback or thoughts are most welcome (in the `Comments’ below, please.)

Q: What do you hope to end up with, as a result of this study?

A: Most simply, a really-big pie-chart, that shows the current component percentages, of `Schools of Thought in the Arts/Humanities/Communication’. Maybe even, a donut-chart. (Donut-charts are often better than pie-charts.)

And then, maybe also conduct the Survey again a year later – or maybe even, every year (?) – to see how those percentages change (or, even evolve) over time. But in fact, since the survey-form is always live, people can do it anytime and if they forward the survey link to others, collecting the results each year is easy. Whether they forward the link depends on whether they think this Knowledge would be good to know. (i.e., How many Schools of Thought are there, and How `big’ are they, each? And, Why?)

Also, obviously – I’ll aim to publish the other Survey results (on: Creativity, etc), in a list, or, some kind of easy-to-read chart/s.

Q: And so, what If, I currently don’t want to click, and open the draft survey itself, but am curious about: What are the 50 (or so) `Schools of Thought’ that you’ve listed out, in the Arts/Humanities/Communication?

A: Here they are:

Schools of Thought in the Humanities / Arts (Draft Only)

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/100-9OZ92Rsoy8VzWHX8w4RQGoj7eTkV1ovFkVwsEX3g/viewform

*EXCERPT from the Survey* i.e. Please note, this Excerpt below is, NOT THE ACTUAL SURVEY ITSELF…

————————-

SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT: 
As an academic (and/or student, or independent scholar) in the Arts/Humanities, what is (or, are) your current School(s) of Thought / Critical Approach(es) / Philosophical Approach(es) / Episteme(s) / Paradigm(s)? *
Please select all that apply, from the list below.
  • Adaptation Studies (e.g. Bluestone, Bruhn, Gjelsvik, Hanssen, Linda Hutcheon, Thomas Leitch)
  • Aestheticism (e.g. Harold Bloom, Dante Gabriel Rossetti, Oscar Wilde)
  • Aesthetics/Philosophy of Art (e.g. Noël Carroll, Peter Lamarque, Stephen Davies, Greg Currie)
  • American Pragmatism (e.g. Charles Sanders Pierce, William James, John Dewey)
  • Archetypal/Mythic (e.g. Maud Bodkin, Northrop Frye, Joseph Campbell, Carl Jung, James Frazer)  
  • Australian Realism (e.g. John Anderson, David Malet Armstrong, J.J.C. Smart)
  • Autobiographical Theory (e.g. Thomas Cooley, Albert E. Stone, Avrom Fleishman, Robert Smith, Paul de Man)
  • Chicago Aristotelians (e.g. R.S. Crane, Wayne Booth, Richard Levin)
  • Cognitive Cultural Studies (e.g. Lisa Zunshine, Patrick Colm Hogan, Nancy Easterlin, Brian Boyd, David Bordwell)
  • Colonialism (e.g. Jürgen Osterhammel, Robert J. C. Young, Diderot, de Tocqueville)
  • Post-Colonialism (e.g. Edward Said, Gayatri Spivak, Leela Gandhi)
  • Complexity (von Bertalanffy, Urry, Luhmann, Heylighen, Koestler, Varela, Capra) [see also: Systems Theory, below]
  • Creativity Studies (e.g. Csikszentmihalyi, Sawyer, Simonton, Gardner, Boden, Koestler)
  • Cultural Studies (e.g. Richard Hoggart, Stuart Hall, Raymond Williams, Marshall McLuhan, Henry Jenkins)
  • Deconstructionism (e.g. Derrida, Paul de Man, J. Hillis Miller)
  • Digital Literary Studies (e.g. Siemens, Schreibman, Crompton, Hoover, Liu)
  • Ecocriticism (e.g. William Rueckert, Joseph Meeker, Cheryll Glotfelty)
  • Empirical Literary Studies (e.g. Willie van Peer, Sonia Zyngier, Marisa Bortolussi, Frank Hakemulder)
  • Evocriticism/Biopoetics/Literary Darwinism/Consilience (e.g. EO Wilson, Brian Boyd, Joseph Carroll, Jon Gottschall, Brett Cooke, Frederick Turner, Michelle Scalise Sugiyama, David Bordwell, Richard Dawkins, Steven Pinker, Daniel Dennett)
  • Existentialism (e.g. Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Albert Camus, Søren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche)
  • Feminism (e.g. Julia Kristeva, Hélène Cixous, Luce Irigaray, Laura Mulvey)
  • Formalism (e.g. Plato, Aristotle, Vladimir Propp, Roman Jakobson, Viktor Shklovsky, David Bordwell)
  • Freudian Psychoanalytic Theory (e.g. Freud, Jacques Lacan, Charles Mauron)
  • Game Studies (e.g. Kurt Squire, Jane McGonigal, Jesper Juul, Henry Jenkins, Ian Bogost, Salen & Zimmerman, John Maynard Smith, Ernest W. Adams)
  • Gender studies (e.g. Judith Butler, Virginia Woolf, Rory Ridley-Duff, Donna Haraway)
  • Genetic Studies (e.g. Jed Deppman, Daniel Ferrer, Michael Groden)
  • Genre Criticism (e.g. Aristotle, Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin, Carolyn Miller)
  • German Hermeneutics / Phenomenology (e.g. Kant, Hegel, Husserl)
  • History of the Book and of Reading (e.g. Finkelstein, Gameson, Chow)
  • Historicism (e.g. Hegel, Marx, Boas)
  • New Historicism (e.g. Stephen Greenblatt, H. Aram Veeser, Michel Foucault)
  • Linguistic Analysis of Literature (e.g. Hasan, Wales, Talib)
  • Literature and Science (e.g. Beer, Gossin, Westfall)
  • Marxism (e.g. Marx, Fredric Jameson, Walter Benjamin, Theodor Adorno,Terry Eagleton, Slavoj Žižek, Habermas)
  • Post-Modernism (e.g. Michel Foucault, Roland Barthes, Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari, Baudrillard, Lyotard, Jameson)
  • Narratology (e.g. Wayne Booth, Gerard Genette, Seymour Chatman, Meir Sternberg, David Herman)
  • New Criticism (e.g. I. A. Richards, T. S. Eliot, Cleanth Brooks)
  • Philosophy of Science (e.g. Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend, Simonton)
  • Practice Theory (e.g. Bourdieu, Giddens, Postill, Schatzki, Latour, Rouse, Pickering)
  • Presentism (e.g LaCapra, Grady & Hawkes, Headlam Wells)
  • Queer Theory (e.g. Michel Foucault, Judith Butler, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick)
  • Reader Response (e.g. Stanley Fish, I. A. Richards, Louise Rosenblatt, Wolfgang Iser)
  • Reception Studies (e.g. Jauss, Hall, Holub)
  • Rhetoric (e.g. Plato, Kenneth Burke, Alex C Parrish)
  • Semiotics (e.g. Peirce, de Saussure, Lévi-Strauss, Barthes, Culler)
  • Structuralism (e.g. Lévi-Strauss, A. J. Greimas, Ferdinand de Saussure, Roland Barthes, Roman Jakobson, Vladimir Propp)
  • Post-Structuralism (e.g. Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Roland Barthes, Jean Baudrillard, J. Hillis Miller, Jacques Lacan, Helene Cixous, Paul de Man)
  • Systems Theory (e.g. Altmann & Koch, Sadowski, von Bertalanffy, Laszlo, Koestler)
  • Territorialism (e.g. Ardrey, Goodenough)
  • Theology/Religion (e.g. Jesus, Mohammed, Moses, Buddha, L Ron Hubbard, Dennis Taylor)
  • Translation Studies (e.g. Toury, Holmes, Venuti)
  • Transmedia Studies (e.g. Marsha Kinder, Henry Jenkins, Christy Dena)
  • Travel Theory (e.g. Jean Baudrillard, Alison Blunt, Kristi Siegel, Umberto Eco) 
Other `School of Thought’: (i.e. My `School’ is not listed above)
– If none of the above categories represents your School/s of Thought, please add add it below, and also add the name of at least one key text/article of the `Critical Theory/Approach’ of that School.
OR – Alternately: UNABLE TO SELF-CLASSIFY:
 
  •  I am currently unable to self-classify my School/s of Thought.
  • (If you answered `YES’ to this last question, that is an interesting result. It possibly implies that: You don’t actually know, what you know. But, this is just one possible implication, of many, and doesn’t necessarily `mean’ anything.)
————————-

*** END OF SAMPLE SECTION OF THE DRAFT SURVEY *** 

StoryAlity_Small

So, the above is just a list of various `Schools of Thought’ from the survey…

Also – another Frequently Asked Question:

Q: I think, perhaps you have made some errors, in the way you have added certain names of certain theorists, into certain Schools of Thought, above-? (and therefore, in the draft `Survey’ form)

A: You may be absolutely correct; This is another element, that the survey is aiming to capture. For example, if only one person suggests that a certain Theorist should / should not be included in a certain School, but, many others in the field agree that it is correct to include them, then, who is right? (This is also an example of how the Field decides on certain things by consensus, in the systems model of Creativity, e.g. Csikszentmihalyi 1988, 1996, 2000, 2006, 2014, etc.)

Also, Bayes’ Theorem applies; updating your view, (or: your opinion) based on new information / knowledge, i.e. information / knowledge that you didn’t have before. (or, in other words, Bayes Theorem means: “We Don’t Know. What We Don’t Yet Know, At The Time”).

Also – on the other hand, just because a lot of people believe that something is true, that does not automatically mean: it is true. As Prof Daniel C. Dennett (1995) – and many others – have noted, a meme [or, moresimply, an idea] does not have to be true, in order to spread, in Culture.

– At any rate, I certainly welcome any feedback / Comments on the Survey Design, below.

And, If you would like to know more about some of the `background theory’ that informs the thinking behind the proposed survey/study, please see the Index to this weblog: https://storyality.wordpress.com/an-index-to-this-blog/

And maybe also see: `The holonic structure of the meme – the unit of culture’:  https://storyality.wordpress.com/2013/12/12/storyality-100-the-holonic-structure-of-the-meme-the-unit-of-culture/

P.S. – And, if I (personally) were to answer the survey, right now, I (personally) would likely tick:

  • Archetypal/Mythic (e.g. Maud Bodkin, Northrop Frye, Joseph Campbell, Carl Jung, James Frazer)  
  • Australian Realism (e.g. John Anderson, David Malet Armstrong, J.J.C. Smart)
  • Autobiographical Theory (e.g. Thomas Cooley, Albert E. Stone, Avrom Fleishman, Robert Smith, Paul de Man)
  • Cognitive Cultural Studies (e.g. Lisa Zunshine, Patrick Colm Hogan, Nancy Easterlin, Brian Boyd, David Bordwell)
  • Complexity (von Bertalanffy, Urry, Luhmann, Heylighen, Koestler, Varela, Capra) [see also: Systems Theory, below]
  • Creativity Studies (e.g. Csikszentmihalyi, Sawyer, Simonton, Gardner, Boden, Koestler, Kaufman etc)
  • Digital Literary Studies (e.g. Siemens, Schreibman, Crompton, Hoover, Liu)
  • Ecocriticism (e.g. William Rueckert, Joseph Meeker, Cheryll Glotfelty)
  • Empirical Literary Studies (e.g. Willie van Peer, Sonia Zyngier, Marisa Bortolussi, Frank Hakemulder)
  • Evocriticism/Biopoetics/Literary Darwinism/Consilience (e.g. EO Wilson, Brian Boyd, Joseph Carroll, Jon Gottschall, Brett Cooke, Frederick Turner, Michelle Scalise Sugiyama, David Bordwell, Richard Dawkins, Steven Pinker, Daniel Dennett)
  • (Neo)Formalism (e.g. Plato, Aristotle, Vladimir Propp, Roman Jakobson, Viktor Shklovsky, David Bordwell)
  • Game Studies (e.g. Kurt Squire, Jane McGonigal, Jesper Juul, Henry Jenkins, Ian Bogost, Salen & Zimmerman, John Maynard Smith, Ernest W. Adams)
  • Genetic Studies (e.g. Jed Deppman, Daniel Ferrer, Michael Groden)
  • Genre Criticism (e.g. Aristotle, Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin, Carolyn Miller)
  • Literature and Science (e.g. Beer, Gossin, Westfall)
  • Narratology (e.g. Wayne Booth, Gerard Genette, Seymour Chatman, Meir Sternberg, David Herman)
  • Philosophy of Science (e.g. Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend, Simonton)
  • Practice Theory (e.g. Bourdieu, Giddens, Postill, Schatzki, Latour, Rouse, Pickering)
  • Systems Theory (e.g. Altmann & Koch, Sadowski, von Bertalanffy, Laszlo, Koestler)
  • Transmedia Studies (e.g. Marsha Kinder, Henry Jenkins, Christy Dena)

But, that’s just me… In a year, it may be a very different list of `Schools’ that I would tick…

Creativity. It's not what you think!

Creativity. What exactly is it, anyway?

P.P.S.:

Q: So, I have completed the draft-survey, but then, the `graph’ at the end didn’t display properly?

A: Yes – there seems to be some issue with the Google Doc survey form, when it displays the cumulative survey results to date. Maybe, there are too many Schools in the form, (50+) and, maybe it breaks the graph-graphic. – I am currently investigating that. – These are exactly the sorts of things it is good to find out, before doing such a survey…

Q: I took the draft-survey, but it only took me [5] mins, rather than the [15] you estimated it might take.

A: if that happened, please comment about that in the Comments below, as, that’s also exactly the sort of thing it would be really useful to know…

Q: Why are you using Science in the Arts? 

A: See: Consilience.

And – for more detail on the evolutionary systems (or, complexity) view of narrative and bioculture in general, see, this book chapter:

StoryAlity #132The holon/parton structure of the Meme, the unit of culture – and the narreme, or unit of story – book chapter (Velikovsky 2016)

And for a great consilience & creativity & evolution reading list, see:

StoryAlity #71On Consilience in the Arts / Humanities / Communication

Comments, always welcome.

——————————————–

JT Velikovsky

High-RoI Story/Screenplay/Movie and Transmedia Researcher

The above is (mostly) an adapted excerpt, from my doctoral thesis: “Communication, Creativity and Consilience in Cinema”. It is presented here for the benefit of fellow screenwriting, filmmaking and creativity researchers. For more, see https://aftrs.academia.edu/JTVelikovsky

JT Velikovsky is also a produced feature film screenwriter and million-selling transmedia writer-director-producer. He has been a professional story analyst for major film studios, film funding organizations, and for the national writer’s guild. For more see: http://on-writering.blogspot.com/

 


NOTES

*  (Actually, for that matter – How do I know, what I think I know? I need to question my ontological and epistemological assumptions.)

As Koestler states – about epistēmēs – in The Ghost In The Machine (1967):

`…just as a grammatically correct sentence conveys no information as to whether it should be taken at face value or in some twisted way, so it also conveys no information regarding its veridity.

Thus, when the message has been received, the question arises whether it is true or false.

Here again, so long as we talk of trivial matters, the question may be settled with relative ease; but in more complex universes of discourse the next question must inevitably be what we mean by true and false; and there we go again, up the spiral staircase into the rarefied atmosphere of the epistemologist’s domain – only to find that there is no end to the climb.

To quote Sir Karl Popper (his italics):

“The old scientific ideal of epistēmē – of absolutely certain, demonstrable knowledge – has proved to be an idol. The demand for scientific objectivity makes it inevitable that every scientific statement must remain tentative for ever. It may indeed be corroborated, but every corroboration is relative to other statements which, again, are tentative…”

(Koestler 1967 [1989], p. 36)

I would also recommend reading Karl Popper for more about Science, and Epistemology, and specifically, on Evolutionary Epistemology, which he first writes about, in Conjectures and Refutations (Popper 1963). Of particular use is his introductory lecture in that book, `On The Sources of Knowledge and Ignorance’ (Popper 1963 [5th Edn 1974], pp 3-30). Another interesting area is Applied Evolutionary Epistemology (Gontier 2012).


REFERENCES

Campbell, DT 1960, ‘Blind Variation and Selective Retention in Creative Thought as in other Knowledge Processes’, Psychological Review, vol. 67, pp. 380–400.

Campbell, DT 1965, ‘Variation and Selective Retention in Socio-Cultural Evolution’, in Herbert R. Barringer, GI Blanksten & RW Mack (eds), Social Change in Developing Areas: A Reinterpretation of Evolutionary Theory, Schenkman, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 19-49.

Campbell, DT 1974, ‘Evolutionary Epistemology’, in PA Schlipp (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper, La Salle, Illinois, vol. 1, pp. 413-59.

Csikszentmihalyi, M & Massimini, F 1985, ‘On The Psychological Selection Of Bio-Cultural Information’, New Ideas in Psychology, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 115-38.

Csikszentmihalyi, M 1996, Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention, 1st edn, HarperCollins, New York.

Gontier, N 2006, ‘Introduction to Evolutionary Epistemology, Language and Culture’, in N Gontier, JP v Bendegam & D Aerts (eds), Evolutionary Epistemology, Language and Culture, Springer, Belgium, pp. 1-29.

Gontier, N 2012, ‘Applied Evolutionary Epistemology: A new methodology to enhance interdisciplinary research between the life and human sciences’, Journal of Philosophy and Science (Kairos: Revista de Filosofia & Ciência), vol. 4, pp. 7-49.

Gontier, N 2014, Evolutionary Epistemology, http://www.iep.utm.edu, viewed 11th June 2014, <http://www.iep.utm.edu/evo-epis/>.

Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. a. (2013). Do people recognize the four Cs? Examining layperson conceptions of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(3), 229–236.

Koestler, A 1989, The Ghost In The Machine, Arkana, London.

Popper, KR (1963), Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. (Essays and Lectures), Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.

Popper, KR (1999), All Life is Problem Solving, Routledge, London; New York.

Proctor, R & Schiebinger, LL 2008, Agnotology: The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif.

Sawyer, RK 2012, Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation, 2nd ed. edn, Oxford University Press, New York.

Simonton, DK 2010, ‘Creative Thought as Blind-Variation and Selective-Retention: Combinatorial models of Exceptional Creativity’, Physics of Life Reviews, vol. 7 (June), no. 2, pp. 156-79.

Velikovsky, J. T. (2016). `The Holon/Parton Theory of the Unit of Culture (or the Meme, and Narreme): In Science, Media, Entertainment and the Arts.‘ In A. Connor & S. Marks (Eds.), Creative Technologies for Multidisciplinary Applications. New York: IGI Global.

Wilson, EO 1998, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge, 1st edn, Knopf: Distributed by Random House, New York.

11 thoughts on “StoryAlity #113 – `Schools of Thought’ in the Arts / Humanities / Communication – Survey

  1. J.T. Velikovsky’s StoryAlity site is one of the few places that gives me hope the feature film form will survive the technological changes, changes to the business model and the changes in viewing habits of new cross-platform audience.

    To the list of works above, may I suggest: Robert Graves’ THE WHITE GODDESS, William Gass’ essays, FINDING A FORM and A TEMPLE OF TEXTS and Italo Calvino’s SIX MEMOS FOR THE NEXT MILLENNIUM? They are less academically rigorous than many of the works on the list but as profound in their anecdotal insight and conclusions.

  2. Pingback: StoryAlity #114 – ASPERA Conference 2014 | StoryAlity

  3. Pingback: StoryAlity #115 – The “Less-Than-One-Percent” Problem in the Domain of Movies | StoryAlity

  4. Pingback: StoryAlity #51 – The Universal Story Structure and Story Memes of the Top 20 RoI Films | StoryAlity

  5. Pingback: StoryAlity #116 – StoryAlity Theory @ `Interventions and Intersections’ 2014 (UWS PG Conference) | StoryAlity

  6. Pingback: StoryAlity #117 – Velikovsky’s 40 Domain Problems in Screenwriting (or: Consilient PhDs I’d Like To See) | StoryAlity

  7. Pingback: StoryAlity #14B – Creativity – the missing link between The Two Cultures | StoryAlity

  8. Pingback: StoryAlity #14B – Creativity – the missing link between The Two Cultures | StoryAlity

  9. Pingback: StoryAlity#70D – The Evolving Self (Csikszentmihalyi 1993) | StoryAlity

  10. Pingback: StoryAlity #114B – The Less Than 1% Problem in the Domain of Novels (Moretti) | StoryAlity

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s