Erasing Knowledge: The Discursive Structure of Globalization

Sovacool, Benjamin K.

doi:10.1080/02691721003632792

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kaylan (2010) reminds us that it “signifies nothing other than itself … [and as an] impossibly wide term, include[s] everything … [and] is as flexible as it is pervasive” (p. 546). In this vein, Sovacool (2010) advises that the term can become so reified that it may occlude its complexity and, especially, its uncertain effects in any given context. This includes the possibility that nation states and local jurisdictions can resist globalization (Pan, 2010).…”

Section: Global Economization and Science Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, school science may be so detached from reality of professional science and technology that students' views of them can be, unwittingly or otherwise, manipulated to suite various purposes. In the context of neoliberal knowledge economies, this often is achieved by encouraging citizens to develop (and re‐develop) personal identities, senses of wellbeing and solidarities with others associated with consumption of semiotic actants (e.g., signs) (e.g., Barber, 2007; Sovacool, 2010; Usher, 2010), such as the positive perspectives described by Allchin (2003), noted above, that might be communicated to students.…”

Section: Global Economization and Science Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Globalizing students acting for the common good

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is apparent that many of us live in a hyper-economized world, in which personal identities and routine practices are significantly oriented towards production and consumption of forprofit goods and services. Extreme consumerism resulting from this orientation often is associated with many personal, social, and environmental problems. Implicated as an agent, among many, in this problematic hyper-economized process is science education. Briefly, our literature reviews suggest that, under influences from apparently hegemonic forces of neoconservatism and neoliberalism, school science often functions to generate knowledge producers, including engineers, scientists and other theoretical workers-who, in turn, may develop and manage mechanisms of production of goods and services on behalf of global economic elite. At the same time, it also is apparent that school science generates a large class of citizens who are prepared, essentially, to serve as consumers-both in terms of faithfully following labor instructions from the aforementioned knowledge producers (who may be accountable mainly to their financiers) and also enthusiastically engaging in repeating cycles of consumption of goods and services. Such a use of education seems undemocratic, at the very least, and highly problematic, assuming an association between school science and many personal, social, and environmental problems. To perhaps bring about a more just and sustainable world, we offer a theoretical framework, along with a more pragmatic version of it, for organizing science and technology education in many contexts. Although based on principles like holism, altruism, realism, egalitarianism, and dualism that we suggest may help school science generate a citizenry willing and able to proactively contribute to the common good, we also urge readers to use it as a basis for further research and development. ß

show abstract

Section: Global Economization and Science Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Global Economization and Science Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Globalizing students acting for the common good

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In such affect-driven societies people try to turn their lives into experience projects, implying an everyday-life with an increasing focus on its aesthetic dimensions and enjoyment as well as authenticity (Gilmore & Pine, 2007). This experience-oriented economy is part of global economic development with its grobalization and glocalization as well as glocapitalization (Zafer Demir, 2009) of nothing or 'nothingisation' (Ritzer, 2007;Sovacook 2010 Emotion and Work, Vol. 2, No.3 (2008): 256-287.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embodied Inter-Affection in and beyond Organizational Life-Worlds

Küpers

2014

Critical Horizons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a phenomenology of affect and discusses its relevance for organizational life-worlds. With Merleau-Ponty, affects are interpreted as bodily and embodied inter-relational phenomena, which have specific pathic, ecstatic and e-motional qualities. Relationally, they will be situated as ''interaffection'' that are part of the inter-corporeality of the ''Flesh'' of wild be(com)ing. Affect and inter-affectivity are then related to organizational lifeworlds, through a critical exploration of different phenomena and effects generated by positive, negative and ambiguous dimensions. Finally, the potentials of affects and affection as part of the nexus of an embodied responsive responsibility and sustainability are discussed and critical perspectives on affective becoming outlined.

show abstract

“…To say that we investigate climate change and energy security ''discourses'' does not imply that we assess language or rhetoric independent of context. Instead, we draw on the term as used by various critical theorists such as Foucault (1979), Hajer (1993, Escobar (1995), andSovacool (2010). Discourse, for these authors, refers to a ''historically emergent collection of objects, concepts, and practices'' that ''mutually constitute'' each other to cohere into stable meaning-systems.…”

Section: Climate Change and Energy Security As ''Discourses''mentioning

confidence: 98%