LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for SOCNET Archives


SOCNET Archives

SOCNET Archives


SOCNET@LISTS.UFL.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SOCNET Home

SOCNET Home

SOCNET  April 2008

SOCNET April 2008

Subject:

Re: German shepherd and social networks

From:

Iain Lang <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Iain Lang <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:37:41 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (91 lines)

*****  To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org  *****

I think a link between the angle taken by Dimitris and that suggested by Olumide and me lies in what Moses referred to: the work of Donna Haraway, particlarly her and others' writings on cyborgs (definition negotiable but generally: entities which straddle the boundary of the human and the non-human, certainly encompassing Dimitris' notion of AIs). The Cyborg Handbook, edited by Chris Gray (Routledge, 1995) contains contributions by Haraway and others and would be a good starting point - probably followed by Haraway's work on animals, as suggested by Moses. Dimitris' general point is an interesting one and of course philosophers of ethics have been discussing the rights and statuses of children, animals, unborn foetuses, and so on for a lot longer than arriviste network scholars like us.

In contrast, the line of thought extending from actor-network theory does not suppose that network members have agency of the same type as human but looks at how human actors refer to and engage with "non-human actors" (which may be inanimate objects) in order to establish and re-establish membership and non-memberships of groups (networks). Susan Leigh Star's idea of "boundary objects" exemplifies one direction in which this idea was taken (see e.g. Star SL and Griesemer JR.1989. Institional Ecology, 'Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science 19:387-420). That human actors make connections with non-human actors in order to forge connections and build alliances with other human actors makes this an area well suited to a network approach - and that goes whether the non-human actors are animals, objects, concepts, or anything else.

With regards
Iain

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dr Iain Lang
Epidemiology & Public Health Group
Peninsula Medical School
RD&E Wonford Site
Barrack Road
Exeter EX2 5DW
UK
tel. +44 (0)1392 406749
email. [log in to unmask]



-----Original Message-----
From: Social Networks Discussion Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dc Christopoulos
Sent: 17 April 2008 11:03
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: German shepherd and social networks

Hi Markku

Interesting question.

The human child entails the prospect of full reciprocated, interactive relations.  In essence it holds the promise of social interaction.  As we ascribe some metaphysical attributes to our relationship with our offspring the tie from the parents side might be a very strong one (and the dependency tie from the side of the child even more so) and therefore a substantive one.  I would conceptualise this as a core periphery one where the child's external ties are brokered/filtered by the parents until in adolescence the child 'revolts' and builds ties unfettered by family brokerage.  Or maybe not so, for those boys still living with their mother at 35 :)

The dog is obviously a more intriguing relation.  The tie exists in the mind of the 'owner' so it could be considered subjectively real.  As a conduit between people the dog does not need to be considered a part of the network.  It is the activity of dog walking, owning etc that brings people together.  Similar to tea parties.  It is apparently true that Border Collies have vocabulary recognition similar to two year old babies but does that interaction imply a social tie?  I doubt that.  Sharing a dog's ownership between two people (the stronger and most unlikely case) could be seen as a choice of bonding rather than an act of bringing a dog into society.

I would argue that the most intriguing development of your argument is whether we can envisage building social ties with AI.  A rudimentary indication of that is that we become partial to artificial characters we create (see second life) or we game with.  But then again that says more about our need to develop ties (even if imaginary) rather than the real existence of such.

My two cents worth

Dimitris

Dr Dimitris C Christopoulos
Senior Lecturer
Department of Politics
UWE-Bristol
Coldharbour Lane
Bristol  BS16  1QY

________________________________

From: Social Networks Discussion Forum on behalf of MARKKU LONKILA (SOSIO)
Sent: Thu 17/04/2008 09:49
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: German shepherd and social networks



*****  To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org <http://www.insna.org/>   *****

Dear socnetters,

I want to stir the pot of social network definitions with a question about the notion of `social´ in social networks. Can a five-year-old German shepherd belong to one´s social network? How about a one-month- old baby? Compared to the dog, the small baby is clearly much less communicative and interactive. Moreover, the dog may well be as central to one´s `social´ life (e.g. though connecting the owner with other dog owners and dogs) than the network member with human dna...

Markku Lonkila



--
Markku Lonkila
Docent, PhD, Researcher
The Finnish Centre for East European Studies / Department of Sociology, University of Helsinki
homepage: http://www.valt.helsinki.fi/staff/lonkila
e-mail: [log in to unmask]

_____________________________________________________________________
SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social network researchers (http://www.insna.org <http://www.insna.org/> ). To unsubscribe, send an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.


This incoming email to UWE has been independently scanned for viruses by McAfee anti-virus software and none were detected




This email was independently scanned for viruses by McAfee anti-virus software and none were found

_____________________________________________________________________
SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008, Week 62
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.UFL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager