Daily Archives: December 6, 2019

Seminar with Guglielmo Feis: “Coding for Humanities”

“The talk takes a hands on practical approach to show how a little bit of familiarity with programming may benefit a researcher in the humanities. We are the machines, pcs are our tool. It is our duty to set them properly and use them to do less boring work (e.g.: typesetting bibs) and have more time to actually think and do our research. After a brief presentation of the benefits of this “Coding for Humanities approach”, I showed how Python programming language doesn’t bite and that Markdown speeds up the production of research outputs.
I briefly introduced GitHub as a way to store and track your progress, while collaborating with the world.
I then presented some real-world tools to automate boring academic task like merging and cutting PDFs, renaming files, organizing bibliographies, building a template to write grant proposals, etc.
To show something useful as well as interesting, I briefly touched Montecarlo simulations and agent-based modelling as well as parsing papers to perform some natural language processing (NLP).”

Guglielmo Feis is a philosopher (BA, MA) with a Ph.D. in Philosophy of Law (i.e. Faculty of Law) “experiencing first hand how to conduct interdisciplinary research and getting bashed from both sides. At least it is harder to get bored, working this way.”.
He has worked on impossibility in the legal domain, Ought implies Can, Social Ontology, normativity conflicts and a bunch of other topics (see on Academia or Research Gate for more). “I’ve been lucky to have wonderful co-authors. Now I am actively engaging working on blockchain and the law (and their philosophical relevance) plus the artifactual thesis of law.”

Seminar with Guglielmo Feis in dialogue with UNIRI CAS SEE fellows was held at the University campus on December 5, 2019.

Seminar with Sabino Paparella “About ‘e-selfing’: from self-branding to Quantified Self”

“Whether is considered under the bad aegis of ‘surveillance capitalism’s’ new-panopticism (Crary, 2013; Zuboff, 2019), or as the ‘organized networks’ affordance (Rossiter, 2006; Lovink/Rossiter, 2011) towards social movements, the political efficiency of new digital media however depends on the transduction of a body-individual physical identity in the Netizen’s digital one. We need a digital identity in order to log in the web. Can it be considered properly a representation of our self? Digital technology seems to imply rather a production of the self, by the sound of things. This production of self set up by the digital dispositif – henceforth ‘e-selfing’ – comes by a search for authenticity of the self. One of the main features of Web 2.0 is the rising need for a digital True Identity, endorsed by the claim of ‘absolute transparency’;. Unlike the geek sub-culture of Web 1.0, which was celebrating multiple identity of self by using alias, avatar, nicknames, the interactive digital turn, implemented first by the blogosphere and then by the social media, involves the definition of an unambiguous and verifiable self, which stays always the same and acts predictably, according to a strategy of ‘narrative hypercoherence’ (Ippolita, 2016). We would suggest here to outline e-selfing in terms of disintermediation. Disintermediation usually means the shortening of the supply chain from a producer to a consumer. But what about a system, like the currently digital one, in which producers and consumers are the same (so-called ‘prosumers’)? Put another way, what if the object of disintermediation is properly Self-access, the access to
one’s digital self? What kind of mediation, or resistance, is dropping out in this case?

We will investigate to what extent the output of disintermediation in some strategies of e-selfing (self-branding) could be a decreasing relational nature of the self. Maybe what is at stake in the evaluation of this relationality is the possibility to find something like a ‘digital subjectivity’. An individual becomes a subject insofar as is object of another one. It depends on acknowledging that the very identity is related to being addressed from someone: in other words, what we are is not the same than who we are (Cavarero, 1997). Is the digital production of our coherent, True Self capable of this distinction? If ‘who we are’ is performing in process, through specific and prompt acts, to what extent can it be expressed by the universal knowledge of a computable essence, by ‘self-knowledge through numbers’, as in Quantified Self (QS) digital community? Who I am is contingent, that is to say: any time, I’m who I perform, although I may not to. That goes both ways: ‘who I am’ means the possibility of preferring not to do ‘what I am’ too, like the Melville’s Scrivener Bartleby. This missed overlap, the gap between who and what we are, which some e-selfing strategies maybe risk filling in the light of the transparency principle, conveys the subjectification power, which only makes political an identity.”

Sabino Paparella, fellow of UNIRI CAS SEE, is “Cultore della materia” (assistant) in Theoretical Philosophy at the University of Bari (Italy), where he got his PhD and where he taught in the Master Program in “Philosophy, Politics and Economics in Med (PPE)”. He mainly deals with French contemporary philosophy and he spent some research periods in Paris. He wrote some papers on the political implications of discursive and conceptual machineries.
He took part in the Italian Thought Network and in the “Permanent Seminar of Philosophy and Politics” at Scuola Normale Superiore (Pisa). He worked as journalist and, currently, he is teaching “History and Philosophy” at the high-school.

The seminar was held on December 5, 2019 in dialogue with UNIRI CAS SEE fellows at the University Campus in Rijeka.

Seminar with Dragana Kovačević Bielicki

Mapping the anti-migrant protests in Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina through their online media coverage (2015-present)

“The ‘migrant crisis’ in Europe in 2015 and beyond has resulted in an abundance of pro- and anti-migration discourses and practices. The continuous arrival and transit of migrants has been accompanied by rising anti-migration sentiments and reactions. This presentation will focus on the organized anti-migrant protests in three transit countries along the Western Balkan migration route: Serbia, Croatia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina (hereafter BH), in the period between 2015 and present. The aim is to first map and consequently explain the anti-migrant protests that have been organized across the territory of these three countries starting from the so-called migrant crisis and into the present, through the lens of their online coverage. Protests are one of the most visible practices used to express rejection of any social phenomenon, also a practice that tends to attract media attention. Online news media are among the most prominent environments relevant to the reproduction of cultures of rejection and cultures of acceptance alike. This is why, in addition to mapping the protests so far organized, this research will seek to explain how these protests are framed in the online news media, and what experiences and discourses fuel the negative reactions to migrants and migration. Serbia and Croatia are two of the Western Balkan countries that have been prominently featured as transit countries along the Balkan route during the ‘crisis’ in 2015 and 2016. In addition, it is important to include BH in the proposed case study, a currently highly relevant transit country. In the first years of the ‘crisis’ BH was not widely seen as one of the desirable stops along the route for most migrants. However, in 2018, due to the constant redirection of migrants arriving to the Balkans, BH experienced the unprecedented scale of migrant movement through its territory, people attempting to cross to Croatia and further. This resulted in recent widespread media coverage of the migrants’ movement and treatment in this country as well. This presentation will theoretically be framed through the notion of interdiscursivity, seen as the key to understanding how discursive change is related to social change. The interdiscursive context of a text refers to recontextualization of other texts and discourses (Fairclough 1992; Wodak & Fairclough 2010). Digital ethnography is the method I will employ to collect material, while the analyzes of the material will be informed by Multimodal Critical Discourse Analyses or MCDA, most specifically as outlined by Kress and Leuven (2001).”

Dragana Kovačević Bielicki is a migration researcher with background in social anthropology and philosophy.  She received a PhD in Migration, Nationalism and Culture Studies in 2016 from the University of Oslo. In addition, she holds degrees from Central European University (MA, Nationalism Studies) and the University of Belgrade (BA, Philosophy). A monograph based on her doctoral research was published in 2017 with the title Born in Yugoslavia – Raised in Norway: Former Child Refugees and Belonging (Oslo, Novus Press, 2017). She is a returning lecturer in Peace and Conflict Studies at the International Summer School, University of Oslo.

The seminar in dialogue with the UNIRI CAS SEE Fellows was held via Skype on December 5, 2019 at the University Campus in Rijeka.