Sociotechnocanonicon/2019 Planning: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:24, 5 June 2019

This space is for adding ideas for the 2019 Sociotechnocanonicon.

Format

Kaylea liked the jitsi format and participation from non-cdsc
Would it be feasible to offer reading credit for it? Or would that ruin it?

Credit would be easy to offer. People that need/want credit can take it for credits. Folks that don't need it can do it without. I've been in reading groups were some (but not all) people took it for credit and thought the dynamic was great. —mako ๛

Sounds good to me. Kaylea (talk) 01:27, 16 March 2019 (EDT)

Content

Are there other canonical texts we're not getting to?
- What about Marx, Weber, Durkheim?
- Adam Smith, Darwin, Foucault?
- Aristotle, Hobbes, Mill?

All of these are possible to get from other places including in any number of social theory courses offered at UW. I think I'd have a preference for doing something closer to specifics of what we study but that still has very broad appeal. Olson's wikipedia:The Logic of Collective Action, Marwell and Oliver's The Critical Mass in Collective Action, and/or Axelrod's wikipedia:The Evolution of Cooperation. A more controversial suggestion would be Kropotkin's wikipedia:Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution —mako ๛

I'm not familiar with any of these but they do seem pretty appealing based on their descriptions, and I'll keep my eye out for opportunities to sojourn into less-adjacent canons from the broader UW. Kaylea (talk) 01:27, 16 March 2019 (EDT)

Maybe this is too close to the wrong canon, but I keep running into Coleman and Schelling and would like to do a more comprehensive read.Kaylea (talk) 18:58, 11 April 2019 (EDT)
Claude Shannon (or at least someone else's summary of information theory) Aaronshaw (talk) 16:38, 7 May 2019 (EDT)
Hayek (on information) Aaronshaw (talk) 16:39, 7 May 2019 (EDT)
Merton, Blau 205.175.106.173 20:42, 7 May 2019 (EDT)

If we want to read something ecological I would pick "organizations evolving" by Reuf and Aldrich. It may be a bit too high level and its kind of a textbook. I'd also be excited to do Marx, Weber, Durkheim. Another idea for a social theory book is "Constructing Social Theories" by Stinchcomb. Groceryheist (talk) 18:24, 5 June 2019 (EDT)

Revision as of 22:23, 5 June 2019 (edit) Groceryheist (talk \| contribs) (→‎Content) ← Older edit		Revision as of 22:24, 5 June 2019 (edit) (undo) Groceryheist (talk \| contribs) No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 21:		Line 21:
	* Merton, Blau [[Special:Contributions/205.175.106.173\|205.175.106.173]] 20:42, 7 May 2019 (EDT)		* Merton, Blau [[Special:Contributions/205.175.106.173\|205.175.106.173]] 20:42, 7 May 2019 (EDT)

	::: If we want to read something ecological I would pick "organizations evolving" by Reuf and Aldrich. It may be a bit too high level and its kind of a textbook. I'd also be excited to do Marx, Weber, Durkheim. Another idea for a social theory book is "Constructing Social Theories" by Stinchcomb.		::: If we want to read something ecological I would pick "organizations evolving" by Reuf and Aldrich. It may be a bit too high level and its kind of a textbook. I'd also be excited to do Marx, Weber, Durkheim. Another idea for a social theory book is "Constructing Social Theories" by Stinchcomb. [[User:Groceryheist\|Groceryheist]] ([[User talk:Groceryheist\|talk]]) 18:24, 5 June 2019 (EDT)