So, a new edition of Organizations:Rational, Natural, and Open Systems by W. Richard Scott is out. Its co-authored by Gerry Davis (Who was a student of Scott’s at Stanford, apparently) and has a newer, more active title (stamp out nouns!). This book was an absolute classic for me doing my PhD at IESE. It also helped me bridge sociology and management. So, like the priests we are, it is good to turn back to the canon and see what is there.
Organizations and Organizing: rational, natural, and open systems perspectives.
I wanted to see if it is worth reading/buying the new version. A quick comparison of the two tables of contents reveals that some major changes were made. After Break for table.
I am encouraging all of my former Capstone (“Rise of the Network Society”) students to attend this one. Lessig is an important voice discussing the pratcical and poitical implications of the overalps between technology, culture, law, and also politics.
As the press release states, Professor Eric Faden, who is bringing Lessig, is a client due to his creation of A Fair(y) Use Tale which explore issues of copyright protection.
Looks good! Hope you can make it!
News: Lessig talk on ‘hybrid economy’ March 27 || Bucknell University
Lawrence Lessig, the renowned copyright and intellectual property rights author and Stanford Law School professor, will present a talk titled, “Remix — Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy,” on Thursday, March 27, at 7 p.m. in Bucknell University’s Trout Auditorium.
The talk is free and open to the public.
I am not an innovator, but maybe a first or late first adopter. Of course, it varies by network too. At my university, I seem to be clearly an early adopter of many collaborative technologies (blogs, wikis, virtual worlds). Anyway, this blog came up and seemed to be worth exploring further as my own scholarly work about Web 2.0/living web also takes on living web forms.
Mitchell Waldrop, coincidentally, is also the author of Complexity which is one of my favorite books and indirectly influenced my choices of scholarly interests in grad school and beyond.
This is a stub until I can look at the blog more.
Scholarship 2.0: An Idea Whose Time Has Come: <strong>Science 2.0</strong>
Scholarship 2.0 is devoted to describing and documenting the forms, facets, and features of alternative Web-based scholarly publishing philosophies and practices. The variety of old and new metrics available for assessing the impact, significance, and value of Web-based scholarship is of particular interest.
My friend John Hunter, who is a crazy Comaprative Huamnities schoalr who is trying to bridge neurscience and humanities, put me onto this NY outift.
Philoctetes – Home
Their purpose is to… well, I’ll let them say:
The Philoctetes Center for the Multidisciplinary Study of the Imagination was established to promote an integrated, interdisciplinary approach to the understanding of creativity and the imaginative process.
The Center creates and supports projects, public forums, research and information gathering which foster cooperation and dialogue among diverse disciplines, while seeking to create public awareness of these efforts.
They had a program about education in SecondLife, a topic of absolutely explosive interest from where I stand.
The center looks interesting with a ranged of MDs and PhDs and a definite NYC cosmopolitan vibe. How do they fund such a thing, I wonder.
Given its relative accessibility (3 hours from here), looks like something I will have to explore further.
Not only did they diss cute, rakishly-tilted Pluto, no the astronomers are really messin’ with my head.
McClatchy Washington Bureau | 03/04/2008 | Our solar system isnt what it used to be
Under the new definition, the International Astronomical Union has officially recognized 11 planets: eight traditional ones plus three “dwarf planets. The dwarfs are Pluto; Ceres, which was thought to be an asteroid between Mars and Jupiter; and Eris, an object thats slightly larger than Pluto and farther from the sun.
At least 40 more dwarfs have been spotted even farther out and are awaiting official recognition. They bear names such as Quaoar, Sedna, Orcus, Varuna and Ixion. Dozens of others are known only by code numbers.
Maybe they miss the golden days of Galileo and Copernicus. They figure the stodgy field of astronomy will be shaken up by creating controversy and having the civil-religious authorities persecute them so they can be martyred on the high altar of science.
They still seem street-dumb though. They gave away those dwarf planet names for firesale prices. What would the naming rights of a dwarf planet be worth? How many telescopes could be bought with the proceeds from the official Gates planet, or Nike planetoid.
Glenn Greenwald digs up this real gem from Adam Smith.
In great empires the people who live in the capital, and in the provinces remote from the scene of action, feel, many of them, scarce any inconveniency from the war; but enjoy, at their ease, the amusement of reading in the newspapers the exploits of their own fleets and armies . . . .
They are commonly dissatisfied with the return of peace, which puts an end to their amusement, and to a thousand visionary hopes of conquest and national glory from a longer continuance of the war.
I joke with friends about what its like to be living during the apex and fall of the empire. Especially when you consider how much our army looks like a mercenary army between private contractors and the growth of citizen-seeking legal aliens. Machaivelli had something to say about what happens to the prince who relies on mercenaries.
This also happens to remind me of the admonishments the younger Holmes had for his father in their civil war correspondence. Been reading that in Louis Menand’s the Metaphysical Club. The younger one basically keeps telling Pa to lay off about how the war should be fought and that poorly fought wars, even for a good cause, are still major cluster fucks. Well, I’m paraphrasing.
Reading “The Generative Properties of Richness” by Karl Weick (h/t to Ted), he brought up this great quotation from the recollections of a former student of Louis Agassiz, a Swiss-born zoologist and geologist.
After forcing his students to spend hours staring at a fish and asking them to explain what they really saw (and muttering “No, that is not right” in a guttural Swiss accent, I suppose) one of these poor/lucky students starts to draw the fish. Agassiz clucks:
‘That is right, a pencil is one of the best eyes.’
I love it. I know that I don’t really own, or get, an idea until I commit finger to keyboard, pen to paper.
What is often frustrating though is that to do such writing, such seeing, means I need to take the time to write a lot more. For example, I always wanted to take copious reading notes on anything I read. But the pressures to finish, to make progress, to show results means I don’t. and then you end up with the ridiculous situation where you have “forgotten” you read an article untill you discover two copies with notes.
At least it is affirming when they underlining is 90% the same. yeah consistency of consciousness!