CHI TIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU …
Tiêu đề
What the humanities are for - A semiotic perspective
Tác giả
Cobley P.
Năm xuất bản
2014
Source title
American Journal of Semiotics
Số trích dẫn
9
DOI
10.5840/ajs2014303/411
Liên kết
Tóm tắt
In the wake of both 9/11 and the financial crisis of 2008, the humanities have been offered as constituents of higher education which, if more prominent and more strenuously promoted, might have prevented both events. At the same time, the humanities have undergone an assault from governments in the West, with massively reduced or wholly cut funding as part of an attempt to promote science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in universities. The response from parts of the humanities to these government initiatives has been strident, insisting that a thriving humanities or liberal arts curriculum is crucial to democracy, ethics and citizenship, and that the humanities should be an essential ingredient of science and business education. Contemporary semiotics' deployment of the concept of Umwelt demonstrates that the contribution the humanities might make to theory, practice and social life remains indispensable. Yet this contribution is of a rather different character to that portrayed in the traditional defence of 'humanistic' study. Indeed, the example of semiotics reveals that the humanities themselves are regularly misconceived.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Agamben G., Homo Sacer, (1998); Alibhai-Brown Y., After Multiculturalism, (2000); Althusser L., Marxism and humanism, For Marx, (1969); AMERICAN COUNCIL OF LEARNED SOCIETIES, Text of 'speaking for the humanities, Chronicle of Higher Education, 35, (1988); Andrews K.R., Liberal Education for Competence and Responsibility, (1994); Barthes R., From work to text, Image-music-text, pp. 155-164, (1977); Bate J., Introduction, (2011); Bate J., The Public Value of the Humanities, (2011); Beard M., Live Classics Or 'What's the use of Aeschylus in Darfur'?, (2011); Bennis W.G., O'Toole J., How business schools lost their way, Harvard Business Review, pp. 96-104, (2005); Blasco M., Cultural pragmatists? Student perspectives on learning culture at a business school, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8, 2, pp. 174-187, (2009); Bourdieu P., Distinction, (1984); Brier S., Cybersemiotics: Why Information Is Not Enough, (2008); Brier S., Cybersemiotics: An evolutionary worldview going beyond entropy and meaning into the question of meaning, Entropy, 12, pp. 1902-1920, (2010); Bryson J.S., How jihadist education breeds violence, Public Discourse, (2010); Cannizzaro S., Cobley P., Biosemiotics, politics and sebeok's move from linguistics to semiotics, Biosemiotic Perspectives in Linguistics, (2015); Churchwell S., Humanities: Why the study of human culture still matters, Times Higher Education, (2014); Cobley P., The American Thriller: Generic Innovation and Social Change in the 1970s, (2000); Cobley P., Semioethics, voluntarism and anti-humanism, New Formations, 62, pp. 44-59, (2007); Cobley P., Cultural implications of biosemiotics, Biosemiotics, 3, 2, pp. 225-244, (2010); Cobley P., To be means to communicate, The American Journal of Semiotics, 30, 3-4, pp. 229-246, (2014); Cobley P., Enhancing survival by not enhancing survival: Sebeok's semiotics and the ultimate paradox of modelling, The American Journal of Semiotics, 30, 3-4, pp. 191-204, (2014); Cobley P., Randviir A., What is sociosemiotics?, Sociosemiotica Special Issue of Semiotica, 173, 1-4, pp. 1-39, (2009); Cobley P., Stjernfelt F., Scaffolding development and the human condition, Biosemiotics, (2015); Colby A., Ehrlich T., Sullivan W.M., Dolle J.R., Rethinking Undergraduate Business Education: Liberal Learning for the Profession, (2011); Collini S., What Are Universities For?, (2012); Deely J.N., Semiosis and Jakob von Uexküll concept of Umwelt, Realism for the 21st Century: A John Deely Reader, pp. 239-258, (2009); Deely J.N., Semiotics Seen Synchronically: The View from 2010, (2010); Deely J.N., The ethical entailment of semiotic animal, Semiotic Animal, pp. 107-125, (2010); Deely J., Ponzio A., Petrilli S., The Semiotic Animal, (2005); De George R.T., Business as a Humanity: A Contradiction in Terms?, (1994); De Waal F.B.M., Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals, (1996); Donaldson T.J., Freeman E.R., Business as a Humanity, (1994); Feldman D.C., The food's no good and they don't give us enough: Reflections on Mintzberg's critique of MBA education, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, 2, pp. 217-220, (2005); Fish S.E., Will the humanities save us?, New York Times, (2008); Freeman E.R., Epilogue, (1994); Gambetta D., Hertog S., Engineers of jihad, Sociology Working Papers, pp. 1-88, (2007); Ghoshal S., Bad management theories are destroying good management practice, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, 1, pp. 75-91, (2005); Gordon R.A., Howell J.E., Higher Education for Business, (1959); Hoffmeyer J., Surfaces inside surfaces. On the origin of agency and life, Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 5, 1, pp. 33-42, (1998); Hoffmeyer J., Biosemiotics. An Examination Into the Signs of Life and the Life of Signs, (2008); Huyssen A., After the Great Divide: Modernism, Mass Culture, Postmodernism, (1986); Kagan J., The Three Cultures: Natural Sciences, Social Sciences and the Humanities in the 21st Century, (2009); Kelly M., Language Matters 2. Modern Languages, (2011); Kull K., Semiotica, 134, 1-4, (2001); Lotman Y.M., The text and the structure of its audience, New Literary History, 14, 1, pp. 81-87, (1982); Marrone G., The Invention of the Text, (2014); Mcallister Q.O., Business Executives and the Humanities, (1951); Mcdonald R., The Value of Art and the Art of Evaluation, (2011); Mintzberg H., Managers Not MBAs: A Hard Look at the Soft Practice of Managing and Management Development, (2004); Morsing M., Rovira A.S., Prologue: Business schools as usual?, Business Schools and Their Contribution to Society, pp. xviii-xxi, (2011); Morsing M., Rovira A.S., Business Schools and Their Contribution to Society, (2011); Nelson J.K., Poms L.W., Wolf P.P., Developing efficacy beliefs for ethics and diversity management, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11, 1, pp. 49-68, (2012); Nussbaum M.C., Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities, (2010); O'Brien R., Foreword, (2010); O'Gorman F., Making Meaning: Literary Research in the Twenty-first Century, (2011); Parker Pearson M., The Value of Archaeological Research, (2011); Petrilli S., Sign Studies and Semioethics: Communication, Translation and Values, (2014); Pfeffer J., Fong C.T., The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1, 1, pp. 78-95, (2002); Pierson F.C., The Education of American Businessmen, (1959); Popper B., Build-a-bomber: Why do so many terrorists have engineering degrees?, Slate, (2009); Porter L.W., Mckibbin L.E., Management Education and Development: Drift or Thrust Into the 21st Century?, (1988); Puges L., European Business Schools and Globalization, (2011); Sebeok T.A., Neglected figures in the history of semiotic inquiry: Jakob von uexküll, The Sign and its Masters, (1979); Sebeok T.A., Prefigurements of art, Semiotica, 27, 1-2, pp. 3-73, (1979); Winner I.P., Umiker-Sebeok J., The Semiotics of Culture; Solomon R.C., Business and the Humanities: An Aristotelian Approach to Business Ethics, (1994); Starkey K., Tempest S., The business school in ruins?, Management Education and the Humanities, pp. 101-112, (2006); Starkey K., Tiratsoo N., The Business School and the Bottom Line, (2007); Tonnessen M., The biosemiotic glossary project: Agent, agency, Biosemiotics, 7, 3, (2014); Tuchman G., Wannabe U: Inside the Corporate University, (2009); Von Uexkull J., An Introduction to Umwelt, pp. 107-110, (1936); Brunow G., Niegeschaute Welten, pp. 11-17; Brunow G., The New Concept of Umwelt: A Link Between Science and the Humanities, pp. 111-123, (1937); Die neue Umweltlehre: Ein Bindeglied zwischen Natur- und Kulturwissenschaften, Die Erziehung, 13, 5, pp. 185-199; Watt G., Hard Cases, Hard Times and the Humanity of Law, (2011)
Nơi xuất bản
Philosophy Documentation Center
Hình thức xuất bản
Article
Open Access
All Open Access; Green Open Access
Nguồn
Scopus