Space and Science: Power, Networks, and the Circulation of Knowledge in the 16th-19th Centureis. Kontler, L. 2009. abstract bibtex In terms of perceived marginalities, we shall inquire into the production of knowledge, the processing of locally collected pieces of information as system of knowledge to be disseminated for universal consumption, by keeping our focus on the European/colonial divide as well as the internal cleavages of the European continent. The course thus: - develops a comprehensive and critical understanding of the differentials of knowledge production in regional and global contexts over a long period crucial to the establishment of the importance of such differentials - provides familiarity with current research in the field, elaborating a range of historical and interdisciplinary approaches with a view also to developing a new research agenda - through the involvement of visiting scholars in the forefront of the field, it enhances the internationalization of work done at CEU Based on recent scholarship that contests simplistic assumptions about the ‘uniqueness’ and ‘universality’ of ‘Western’ science/knowledge, we approach the putative ‘superiority,’ ‘primacy,’ and ‘centrality’ of a part of Europe as an uneven and contingent process, whose shifting criteria over the centuries have yet to be defined. Inspired by the history and anthropology of encounter, we acknowledge the dual nature of the theme: the self-understanding and self-representation of every culture is shaped in contrast to others, should these ‘others’ be located outside or inside the continent. There is significant scholarship on the European colonies, regarded as Europe’s most significant external counterparts. Much less is known about the intra-European regions. To what extent can they be included in ‘Europe,’ and to what degree did they constitute Europe’s exotic ‘other’? We would like to test the possibility of a dynamic approach to “European centrality” from these relative peripheries. We take due account of the importance of the optics through which this phenomenon was viewed and represented in several angles of 16-19th century Europe itself by contemporaries. The latter conceived of their civilization as a system which was coherent, but at the same time, highly emulative in many senses, and was formed in a dialogue with and dialectical contestation of perceived core zones in Europe. Such emulation would include the increasing acceptance of scientific achievement as a token of excellence at local, national, continental and other levels. If intercultural encounter denies simplistic and mechanistic models of transfer, we would like to analyze the nature of knowledge circulation in the borderlands of Europe. To what extent did hey perceive themselves as participants in and contributors to the European claims of superiority? If one rejects models of simple diffusion and acceptance, what was the nature of reception and reconfiguration of knowledge in these regions? What was their relationship with the metropolitan counterpart(s)? What kind of knowledge was (or was not) relevant, and how was it adopted to the local circumstances? Drawing on revisionist historiographies within recent imperial, colonial and science studies, we shall attempt to produce a dynamic vision of European knowledge, where the spaces of command (to use of a term borrowed from geography) were constantly changing, and defined the shifting borders of Europe accordingly.
@unpublished{kontler_space_2009,
title = {Space and {Science}: {Power}, {Networks}, and the {Circulation} of {Knowledge} in the 16th-19th {Centureis}},
abstract = {In terms of perceived marginalities, we shall inquire into the production of knowledge, the processing of locally collected pieces of information as system of knowledge to be disseminated for universal consumption, by keeping our focus on the European/colonial divide as well as the internal cleavages of the European continent. The course thus: - develops a comprehensive and critical understanding of the differentials of knowledge production in regional and global contexts over a long period crucial to the establishment of the importance of such differentials - provides familiarity with current research in the field, elaborating a range of historical and interdisciplinary approaches with a view also to developing a new research agenda - through the involvement of visiting scholars in the forefront of the field, it enhances the internationalization of work done at CEU Based on recent scholarship that contests simplistic assumptions about the ‘uniqueness’ and ‘universality’ of ‘Western’ science/knowledge, we approach the putative ‘superiority,’ ‘primacy,’ and ‘centrality’ of a part of Europe as an uneven and contingent process, whose shifting criteria over the centuries have yet to be defined. Inspired by the history and anthropology of encounter, we acknowledge the dual nature of the theme: the self-understanding and self-representation of every culture is shaped in contrast to others, should these ‘others’ be located outside or inside the continent. There is significant scholarship on the European colonies, regarded as Europe’s most significant external counterparts. Much less is known about the intra-European regions. To what extent can they be included in ‘Europe,’ and to what degree did they constitute Europe’s exotic ‘other’? We would like to test the possibility of a dynamic approach to “European centrality” from these relative peripheries. We take due account of the importance of the optics through which this phenomenon was viewed and represented in several angles of 16-19th century Europe itself by contemporaries. The latter conceived of their civilization as a system which was coherent, but at the same time, highly emulative in many senses, and was formed in a dialogue with and dialectical contestation of perceived core zones in Europe. Such emulation would include the increasing acceptance of scientific achievement as a token of excellence at local, national, continental and other levels. If intercultural encounter denies simplistic and mechanistic models of transfer, we would like to analyze the nature of knowledge circulation in the borderlands of Europe. To what extent did hey perceive themselves as participants in and contributors to the European claims of superiority? If one rejects models of simple diffusion and acceptance, what was the nature of reception and reconfiguration of knowledge in these regions? What was their relationship with the metropolitan counterpart(s)? What kind of knowledge was (or was not) relevant, and how was it adopted to the local circumstances? Drawing on revisionist historiographies within recent imperial, colonial and science studies, we shall attempt to produce a dynamic vision of European knowledge, where the spaces of command (to use of a term borrowed from geography) were constantly changing, and defined the shifting borders of Europe accordingly.},
author = {Kontler, Laszlo},
year = {2009},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"SpRiEiTuv5raPD6Eh","bibbaseid":"kontler-spaceandsciencepowernetworksandthecirculationofknowledgeinthe16th19thcentureis-2009","author_short":["Kontler, L."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"unpublished","type":"unpublished","title":"Space and Science: Power, Networks, and the Circulation of Knowledge in the 16th-19th Centureis","abstract":"In terms of perceived marginalities, we shall inquire into the production of knowledge, the processing of locally collected pieces of information as system of knowledge to be disseminated for universal consumption, by keeping our focus on the European/colonial divide as well as the internal cleavages of the European continent. The course thus: - develops a comprehensive and critical understanding of the differentials of knowledge production in regional and global contexts over a long period crucial to the establishment of the importance of such differentials - provides familiarity with current research in the field, elaborating a range of historical and interdisciplinary approaches with a view also to developing a new research agenda - through the involvement of visiting scholars in the forefront of the field, it enhances the internationalization of work done at CEU Based on recent scholarship that contests simplistic assumptions about the ‘uniqueness’ and ‘universality’ of ‘Western’ science/knowledge, we approach the putative ‘superiority,’ ‘primacy,’ and ‘centrality’ of a part of Europe as an uneven and contingent process, whose shifting criteria over the centuries have yet to be defined. Inspired by the history and anthropology of encounter, we acknowledge the dual nature of the theme: the self-understanding and self-representation of every culture is shaped in contrast to others, should these ‘others’ be located outside or inside the continent. There is significant scholarship on the European colonies, regarded as Europe’s most significant external counterparts. Much less is known about the intra-European regions. To what extent can they be included in ‘Europe,’ and to what degree did they constitute Europe’s exotic ‘other’? We would like to test the possibility of a dynamic approach to “European centrality” from these relative peripheries. We take due account of the importance of the optics through which this phenomenon was viewed and represented in several angles of 16-19th century Europe itself by contemporaries. The latter conceived of their civilization as a system which was coherent, but at the same time, highly emulative in many senses, and was formed in a dialogue with and dialectical contestation of perceived core zones in Europe. Such emulation would include the increasing acceptance of scientific achievement as a token of excellence at local, national, continental and other levels. If intercultural encounter denies simplistic and mechanistic models of transfer, we would like to analyze the nature of knowledge circulation in the borderlands of Europe. To what extent did hey perceive themselves as participants in and contributors to the European claims of superiority? If one rejects models of simple diffusion and acceptance, what was the nature of reception and reconfiguration of knowledge in these regions? What was their relationship with the metropolitan counterpart(s)? What kind of knowledge was (or was not) relevant, and how was it adopted to the local circumstances? Drawing on revisionist historiographies within recent imperial, colonial and science studies, we shall attempt to produce a dynamic vision of European knowledge, where the spaces of command (to use of a term borrowed from geography) were constantly changing, and defined the shifting borders of Europe accordingly.","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Kontler"],"firstnames":["Laszlo"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2009","bibtex":"@unpublished{kontler_space_2009,\n\ttitle = {Space and {Science}: {Power}, {Networks}, and the {Circulation} of {Knowledge} in the 16th-19th {Centureis}},\n\tabstract = {In terms of perceived marginalities, we shall inquire into the production of knowledge, the processing of locally collected pieces of information as system of knowledge to be disseminated for universal consumption, by keeping our focus on the European/colonial divide as well as the internal cleavages of the European continent. The course thus: - develops a comprehensive and critical understanding of the differentials of knowledge production in regional and global contexts over a long period crucial to the establishment of the importance of such differentials - provides familiarity with current research in the field, elaborating a range of historical and interdisciplinary approaches with a view also to developing a new research agenda - through the involvement of visiting scholars in the forefront of the field, it enhances the internationalization of work done at CEU Based on recent scholarship that contests simplistic assumptions about the ‘uniqueness’ and ‘universality’ of ‘Western’ science/knowledge, we approach the putative ‘superiority,’ ‘primacy,’ and ‘centrality’ of a part of Europe as an uneven and contingent process, whose shifting criteria over the centuries have yet to be defined. Inspired by the history and anthropology of encounter, we acknowledge the dual nature of the theme: the self-understanding and self-representation of every culture is shaped in contrast to others, should these ‘others’ be located outside or inside the continent. There is significant scholarship on the European colonies, regarded as Europe’s most significant external counterparts. Much less is known about the intra-European regions. To what extent can they be included in ‘Europe,’ and to what degree did they constitute Europe’s exotic ‘other’? We would like to test the possibility of a dynamic approach to “European centrality” from these relative peripheries. We take due account of the importance of the optics through which this phenomenon was viewed and represented in several angles of 16-19th century Europe itself by contemporaries. The latter conceived of their civilization as a system which was coherent, but at the same time, highly emulative in many senses, and was formed in a dialogue with and dialectical contestation of perceived core zones in Europe. Such emulation would include the increasing acceptance of scientific achievement as a token of excellence at local, national, continental and other levels. If intercultural encounter denies simplistic and mechanistic models of transfer, we would like to analyze the nature of knowledge circulation in the borderlands of Europe. To what extent did hey perceive themselves as participants in and contributors to the European claims of superiority? If one rejects models of simple diffusion and acceptance, what was the nature of reception and reconfiguration of knowledge in these regions? What was their relationship with the metropolitan counterpart(s)? What kind of knowledge was (or was not) relevant, and how was it adopted to the local circumstances? Drawing on revisionist historiographies within recent imperial, colonial and science studies, we shall attempt to produce a dynamic vision of European knowledge, where the spaces of command (to use of a term borrowed from geography) were constantly changing, and defined the shifting borders of Europe accordingly.},\n\tauthor = {Kontler, Laszlo},\n\tyear = {2009},\n}\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Kontler, L."],"key":"kontler_space_2009","id":"kontler_space_2009","bibbaseid":"kontler-spaceandsciencepowernetworksandthecirculationofknowledgeinthe16th19thcentureis-2009","role":"author","urls":{},"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"html":""},"bibtype":"unpublished","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/teashek","dataSources":["THyNMAXR3JTyp6hr2"],"keywords":[],"search_terms":["space","science","power","networks","circulation","knowledge","16th","19th","centureis","kontler"],"title":"Space and Science: Power, Networks, and the Circulation of Knowledge in the 16th-19th Centureis","year":2009}