Yesterday, an anthropology graduate explained to me the difference between biological anthropology and sociocultural anthropology. Today, I engaged my film studies undergrad class through the methodology of literary adaptation theories. In this video, now I find such a clear explanation of how interdisciplinarity can be envisaged. Many thanks, Prof. Quayson, from India where educational structures at University are being overhauled and I will be able to use these insights at my workspace, perhaps to present the argument for literary studies in a more well defined context. From the University of Delhi.
Hi Richa, I am glad that you found the episode useful. There is clearly much that we can do once we stop thinking from within the strict disciplinary boxes we were trained in. Much to reflect upon. Good luck with it!
Thank you Prof. This is enlightening. Is the argument that individuals who frame the work they do as interdisciplinary need to learn the protocols of those other disciplines or even individuals whose work are interdisciplinary because they work with people from other disciplines need to learn the protocols of the disciplines of the people they work with?
HI Divine, literary theory is a very broad area with several sub divisions. I am going to be sharing a number of episodes soon specifically on spatial theory and its relationship to urban studies. Maybe you will be able to get some clues to coincide to your own interests from there. More anon!
Talking of interdisciplinarity, how could we do a reading of international relations/foreign policy from the “methodological template(s)” of literary theory and rhetorical theory? Thank you, Professor!
Hi Divine, I have an answer to your question, but it would be too complicated to explain it here. Plus, I do not know enough of the protocols of International Relations to make sure that I would be making sense to them. We will have to wait for another occasion for me to try and pick up your request.
Good teaching sire. Thank you for the knowledge. Please sire can you do us a teaching on the 18th century literature with the features and distinctions of each period under it?
Thanks, Peter. I am fairly knowledgeable about most areas of English literature, but alas the 18th century is not one of them. I know something about it but not enough to generate a survey of the kind you suggest. I will have to leave that to experts in the field.
Thank you, Prof! I guess what I’m wondering is how much do we need to know about a specific set of disciplines before engaging in interdisciplinary inquiry? How much would I need to know about cryogenesis, for instance, before reading it from a Marxist lens, perhaps? How much is enough? Thank you!
HI Edmund, better to know more than less about the concepts and methods of another discipline when borrowing from them. So, to stick with your example, you should know as much as possible about cryogenesis before interpreting it from a Marxist lens, otherwise cryogenesists will dismiss you as being sloppy and not knowing what you are talking about.
1. C.P. Snow was a progressive combating the cultural conservatism of Leavis. 2. Deconstruction and feminism have nothing of value to say about quantum mechanics.
Masterful presentation, very elegant and highly interesting subject. Thank you!
Yesterday, an anthropology graduate explained to me the difference between biological anthropology and sociocultural anthropology. Today, I engaged my film studies undergrad class through the methodology of literary adaptation theories. In this video, now I find such a clear explanation of how interdisciplinarity can be envisaged. Many thanks, Prof. Quayson, from India where educational structures at University are being overhauled and I will be able to use these insights at my workspace, perhaps to present the argument for literary studies in a more well defined context. From the University of Delhi.
Hi Richa, I am glad that you found the episode useful. There is clearly much that we can do once we stop thinking from within the strict disciplinary boxes we were trained in. Much to reflect upon. Good luck with it!
Nice work.
Thanks!
Thank you,sir.
This is brilliant, prof ! Thank you.
You're very welcome, Sanjana!
Again, so enlightening!!! Many thanks, Prof!
Thanks again, Akwasi! Much appreciated.
Thank you Prof. This is enlightening. Is the argument that individuals who frame the work they do as interdisciplinary need to learn the protocols of those other disciplines or even individuals whose work are interdisciplinary because they work with people from other disciplines need to learn the protocols of the disciplines of the people they work with?
Yes.
Good job, Prof! Please, I would be glad if you could do a reading of rhetorical theory/literary theory as part of this series. Thank you!
HI Divine, literary theory is a very broad area with several sub divisions. I am going to be sharing a number of episodes soon specifically on spatial theory and its relationship to urban studies. Maybe you will be able to get some clues to coincide to your own interests from there. More anon!
@@CriticReadingWriting Thank you very much, Prof.
Talking of interdisciplinarity, how could we do a reading of international relations/foreign policy from the “methodological template(s)” of literary theory and rhetorical theory? Thank you, Professor!
Hi Divine, I have an answer to your question, but it would be too complicated to explain it here. Plus, I do not know enough of the protocols of International Relations to make sure that I would be making sense to them. We will have to wait for another occasion for me to try and pick up your request.
Thank you very much, Prof!
Good teaching sire. Thank you for the knowledge. Please sire can you do us a teaching on the 18th century literature with the features and distinctions of each period under it?
Thanks, Peter. I am fairly knowledgeable about most areas of English literature, but alas the 18th century is not one of them. I know something about it but not enough to generate a survey of the kind you suggest. I will have to leave that to experts in the field.
Thank you, Prof! I guess what I’m wondering is how much do we need to know about a specific set of disciplines before engaging in interdisciplinary inquiry? How much would I need to know about cryogenesis, for instance, before reading it from a Marxist lens, perhaps? How much is enough? Thank you!
HI Edmund, better to know more than less about the concepts and methods of another discipline when borrowing from them. So, to stick with your example, you should know as much as possible about cryogenesis before interpreting it from a Marxist lens, otherwise cryogenesists will dismiss you as being sloppy and not knowing what you are talking about.
Sir , Is there any pdf ?
Thanks Prof
Any time, Agyeiwaa!
1. C.P. Snow was a progressive combating the cultural conservatism of Leavis. 2. Deconstruction and feminism have nothing of value to say about quantum mechanics.
HI Ralph, on the quantum mechanics question you are unfortunately incorrect. Check out Karen Barad's book and see what you think.