Post by slotahimself (INTP) on Sept 9, 2018 15:55:07 GMT
With consideration that this is a new-and-developing institution with limited human resources, what would you find to be a worthy pursuit for research that would be a general field in which people could specialize in as they see fit, however still be under a certain umbrella in order for our efforts to gain inertia regarding topics?
My reasoning is all follows:
A longer-term focus on a particular overarching subject or field will help us gain inertia as a collective body in the earlier stages. When the Deep Right project (I’ll abbreviate it as DR throughout this post) has a wider array of members, we’ll hit a certain threshold in which we’ll have multiple research groups working. What I want to raise in this post and have generate discussion or action is that I believe that with multiple groups, at least one should focus on an overarching topic for at least several rounds of research, while the other academic directors can branch out as they see fit. I’m proposing that how our group currently stands, this initial-limited body of researchers and academic directors we have be influenced to put their efforts into said overarching topic.
Note that I said influenced to put their efforts into said overarching topic and not subject to put their efforts into said overarching topic. Even if this post would be popular amongst everyone, the mechanics of the organization as it stands now does not enforce a level of continuity within research and it can only be recommended and advised as I understand it to be in its current iteration. The only thing I could do is set the precedent by stating what overarching topic/field I would commit my influence and position to, and consequently choose topics that would be appropriate.
My concern in the near future is that with the amount of people we have now, if topics of research be too wide and disjointed from one another despite the fact they’re still relevant to interests of the DR, that it would take several months for our efforts to intersect into generating new pursuits that may be inspired by our work. Ultimately I think that’s the point of the DR, to research what we find to be perennial, significant, archetypal, structural, and and ancestral and see how they can be ensconced within the metaphysical and the spiritual.
To provide a loose example which demonstrates what I mean by an overarching topic, a good one would be Christianity. Christianity is an overarching topic that has influenced every form of art, media, government, philosophy, etc., to the point in which we can explore endless avenues of research, but still be tethered to the overarching principle of Christianity.
I thought Ken’s first topic was a wonderful one for several reasons since the topic touches on everything that I stated that is relevant to the DR (perennial, significant, archetypal, structural, ancestral, metaphysical, spiritual). Perhaps focusing the topic on art for several rounds of research could be the overarching topic, as to not have his efforts be pursued and then put aside. Nothing will emerge from sporadic research. I envision that by us contributing and exploring our findings in a certain field, it will create the effect of us seeing emerging patterns and interests in our thought, which we can then derive further explorative pursuits from. If we go from art, to the JFK assassination, to social-media, to music as topics, we won’t generate constellating analysis that we can draw from.
Again, the point of this entry is to garner inertia in a certain overarching field and then constellate our findings to realize that the sum of our efforts is greater than the parts because they’re similar in scope. I want to foster emerging thoughts and ideas.
What I would like people to do outside of their general commentary and critiques on my entry, is to provide a few ideas or topics that you feel are good general and overarching topics. If my entry were to win, I would feel obligated to select the overarching topic that was most agreed upon. Every time I were to be a director, I would select topics and questions that would fall under that umbrella. My personal selection is religion, which is general enough to where you can essentially research almost anything you want, but just within the mindframe and scope of the religious aspects of the topic.
Finally I’d just like to say that since the colloquium is a very open format that allows people to be creative and outside-the-box, I don’t want anyone to think that I’m interested in trying to jam everyone into a single-minded category or that I think that’s what’s best for the DR. I personally hope people use the colloquium to explore what they think and what others think. This might be a heavily flawed post, but I’m the first to contribute in this section and just did it my own way. Even if this fails spectacularly and doesn’t adhere to the organizational structure or pursuits of what everyone else wants, then I hope people learned from it. I do stand by the content of my entry even if the mechanics of it aren’t allowed however, but I’m looking forward to everybody’s input.
My reasoning is all follows:
A longer-term focus on a particular overarching subject or field will help us gain inertia as a collective body in the earlier stages. When the Deep Right project (I’ll abbreviate it as DR throughout this post) has a wider array of members, we’ll hit a certain threshold in which we’ll have multiple research groups working. What I want to raise in this post and have generate discussion or action is that I believe that with multiple groups, at least one should focus on an overarching topic for at least several rounds of research, while the other academic directors can branch out as they see fit. I’m proposing that how our group currently stands, this initial-limited body of researchers and academic directors we have be influenced to put their efforts into said overarching topic.
Note that I said influenced to put their efforts into said overarching topic and not subject to put their efforts into said overarching topic. Even if this post would be popular amongst everyone, the mechanics of the organization as it stands now does not enforce a level of continuity within research and it can only be recommended and advised as I understand it to be in its current iteration. The only thing I could do is set the precedent by stating what overarching topic/field I would commit my influence and position to, and consequently choose topics that would be appropriate.
My concern in the near future is that with the amount of people we have now, if topics of research be too wide and disjointed from one another despite the fact they’re still relevant to interests of the DR, that it would take several months for our efforts to intersect into generating new pursuits that may be inspired by our work. Ultimately I think that’s the point of the DR, to research what we find to be perennial, significant, archetypal, structural, and and ancestral and see how they can be ensconced within the metaphysical and the spiritual.
To provide a loose example which demonstrates what I mean by an overarching topic, a good one would be Christianity. Christianity is an overarching topic that has influenced every form of art, media, government, philosophy, etc., to the point in which we can explore endless avenues of research, but still be tethered to the overarching principle of Christianity.
I thought Ken’s first topic was a wonderful one for several reasons since the topic touches on everything that I stated that is relevant to the DR (perennial, significant, archetypal, structural, ancestral, metaphysical, spiritual). Perhaps focusing the topic on art for several rounds of research could be the overarching topic, as to not have his efforts be pursued and then put aside. Nothing will emerge from sporadic research. I envision that by us contributing and exploring our findings in a certain field, it will create the effect of us seeing emerging patterns and interests in our thought, which we can then derive further explorative pursuits from. If we go from art, to the JFK assassination, to social-media, to music as topics, we won’t generate constellating analysis that we can draw from.
Again, the point of this entry is to garner inertia in a certain overarching field and then constellate our findings to realize that the sum of our efforts is greater than the parts because they’re similar in scope. I want to foster emerging thoughts and ideas.
What I would like people to do outside of their general commentary and critiques on my entry, is to provide a few ideas or topics that you feel are good general and overarching topics. If my entry were to win, I would feel obligated to select the overarching topic that was most agreed upon. Every time I were to be a director, I would select topics and questions that would fall under that umbrella. My personal selection is religion, which is general enough to where you can essentially research almost anything you want, but just within the mindframe and scope of the religious aspects of the topic.
Finally I’d just like to say that since the colloquium is a very open format that allows people to be creative and outside-the-box, I don’t want anyone to think that I’m interested in trying to jam everyone into a single-minded category or that I think that’s what’s best for the DR. I personally hope people use the colloquium to explore what they think and what others think. This might be a heavily flawed post, but I’m the first to contribute in this section and just did it my own way. Even if this fails spectacularly and doesn’t adhere to the organizational structure or pursuits of what everyone else wants, then I hope people learned from it. I do stand by the content of my entry even if the mechanics of it aren’t allowed however, but I’m looking forward to everybody’s input.
