Transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary great. Bridging the gap between objective and subjective is awesome. Sacred as an irreducible aspect of reality is spot on. And 95% of this is great. But, tearing down of existing hierarchy without finding a balance for capitalism, for example, does not bode well with me. It has flaws but has merit, it is far from irredeemable. It feels like Dr. Rowland's background in critical feminist theory or marxist lensed literary studies might be peaking through at the top of a new hierarchy here. It also requires the Foucauldian power-knowledge mindset to accept which I am not down with, of course language can be powerful but it is so more than that. We need both the subjective and objective and the third category for sure. But if its truly transdiciplinary there is room for all of this with tearing nothing down. There needs to be a synthesis of the subjective and objective fields with some utilitarian hierarchy. Good lecture. I will review some history sources as to women in education and the birth of these disciplines as well. I think they inherited a lot from the Frankfurt school and brought in their own ideas from elsewhere, but I need to review all that.
I really think the humanities can aid the individual in STEM to be a stronger scientist, a well rounded family member, in balance with his body and world. That is what they were historically for, and they still have a place to do just that. I think the humanities need to be risen up, not tear down what is opposite to it in the educational realm. This message is being delivered to me from a for profit school, from a scholar selling a book, on a capitalist companies media platform. The amount of STEM and existing hierarchies this all rides on on rose out of to deliver these new humanity developments should never be ignored. They can work in tandem to make the world right.
![ОРБАН приехал к ПУТИНУ и "отчитался" о поездке в Киев 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_0ukDovOWq8/mqdefault.jpg)
Art is the key stone species in human ecology.
Is there an audible version of this book?
Transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary great. Bridging the gap between objective and subjective is awesome. Sacred as an irreducible aspect of reality is spot on. And 95% of this is great. But, tearing down of existing hierarchy without finding a balance for capitalism, for example, does not bode well with me. It has flaws but has merit, it is far from irredeemable. It feels like Dr. Rowland's background in critical feminist theory or marxist lensed literary studies might be peaking through at the top of a new hierarchy here. It also requires the Foucauldian power-knowledge mindset to accept which I am not down with, of course language can be powerful but it is so more than that. We need both the subjective and objective and the third category for sure. But if its truly transdiciplinary there is room for all of this with tearing nothing down. There needs to be a synthesis of the subjective and objective fields with some utilitarian hierarchy. Good lecture.
I will review some history sources as to women in education and the birth of these disciplines as well. I think they inherited a lot from the Frankfurt school and brought in their own ideas from elsewhere, but I need to review all that.
I really think the humanities can aid the individual in STEM to be a stronger scientist, a well rounded family member, in balance with his body and world. That is what they were historically for, and they still have a place to do just that. I think the humanities need to be risen up, not tear down what is opposite to it in the educational realm. This message is being delivered to me from a for profit school, from a scholar selling a book, on a capitalist companies media platform. The amount of STEM and existing hierarchies this all rides on on rose out of to deliver these new humanity developments should never be ignored. They can work in tandem to make the world right.
She had me at "transdisciplinary"