The commodification of technology has made it even easier to reach individuals and groups that are physically distant, but virtually neighboring. In the Information Age, new connections between people and groups of people are being created in the virtual world as much as or more than they are in the physical one. Increasingly, the formation, expression, and spread of ideas and information occur in virtual space as opposed to physical space, where the only limitation is the technological connectedness of the actors. The power of ideas and information is what drives Internet relationships and connections. In particular, ideas can be surprisingly empowering, which may culminate as something intellectual such as scientific progress and technological innovation, or something as simple as free access to news and events from other parts of the world. This paper aims to explore ideas as part of networks in virtual space, how it impacts the connections formed, and the society that is thus assembled, drawing on examples as to how ideas may function through actors and connections on the Internet and World Wide Web (hereafter referred to as the Web).

Although ideas are abstract by nature, they have traditionally travelled through actor connections in the physical world. To define idea, one can consider the definition laid out by Merriam-Webster: “a transcendent entity that is a real pattern of which existing things are imperfect representations” (Merriam-Webster). An idea can be as simple as how to boil an egg, or it may be as complex as freedom. The physical home range and mobility of the individual actors, and also the connectedness of the physical mail system usually limit connections in the physical world. Nonetheless, one would have to have a way of obtaining the mailing address of another actor, after having already somehow established a connection. Such connections still proliferate today, but are not the dominating type of connection, especially among the technologically enabled persons of the developed world whose lives are partially being lived out now in the virtual world.

From the perspective of actor-network theory, it is these new connections and new types of connections that will change how society assembles. Ideas in virtual space have the newfound advantage of being an abstraction within an abstract environment. In addition, new types of conflicts and controversies arise out of the newest virtual realms on the Internet as new possibilities are constantly being created. This results in a diverse network of newly created connections that have assembled society in virtual space in a different way than what is possible to occur in physical space. In this paper, I will explore the role of ideas in reassembling society in virtual contexts.

Actor-network theory

In his discussion of actor-network theory (ANT), Bruno Latour (2005) attempts to return to the original definition of social, and to return to being able to trace associations, thereby reassembling society. He aims to clarify that, while social has become a term that has come to mean a type of material, it originally meant a “movement during a process of assembling” (Latour, 2005). The actors, nodes, other elements, and connections form a network, which can be analyzed to reassemble society. In this vein, new connections can be made when actors find a common link through ideas.

Latour engages in a discussion of two approaches to sociology: sociology of the social which focuses on non-social phenomena and aims to use ‘social factors’ to explain the ‘social aspects’ of such phenomena, and sociology of associations which is from the perspective that there is no ‘social dimension’ but that society is one of the connecting elements among many interconnected elements. In other words, there is not a ‘social angle’ to frame a question or problem. This would require approaching the phenomenon of ideas in virtual space not as a social side of the phenomenon of technology, but as connections or associations that are unique to the virtual parts of society that exist or that are being created as part of the process.

It is critical to understand social as a process in the context of the connections made with ideas because it is a dynamic process that includes active as well as passive participants. Social in this case cannot be used to blanket describe the interactions that facilitate the transfer of ideas, but it must be the central process that creates associations for ideas to move through and virtual spaces where they can live. This will then give us the ability to describe how the actors and ideas are connected and interact relative to the network at large. Latour’s work gives a framework for viewing the different elements of the network and deconstructing the social process by which actions are taken to reach configurations.

Virtual space

With relatively recent advances in technology, virtual space – specifically in the form of the Internet – has burgeoned into something much greater and larger than could have been imagined, and with greater complexity making it difficult to comprehend as participants of the space. Virtual space has created a new playground for society, but it has also released economic capacity that has led to the globalized trade networks that we see today. With more effort, we can begin to understand the long term role of virtual space as a new environment for new connections to be made and for society to assemble within.

Technology may be considered to “embod[y] the capacity of societies to transform themselves” (Castells, 2010). It is also the enabling element for virtual space to exist and expand and for the Web to become what it is today. Manuel Castells (2010) discusses how information technology as a mode of production was instrumental to restructuring processes of capitalist systems as modes of development (i.e. informationalism). The relationships of production, experience, and power are discussed to explore how human processes are structured and are put into contexts of class relationships, the state and institutions, and people. These relationships have also traversed into the Web. Nations that have come to be able to take full advantage of technology have propelled themselves forward in the global economy. Cross-cultural exchanges are made possible by the new connections and the nearly boundlessness of the Internet. On another level, multinational collaboration and commerce is much more common and easily managed. The power of technology then also becomes the power to transfer knowledge and information through connections, with the Internet as one main virtual space for connections to be made that form virtual networks of conversation and commerce.

Even though these global macro level relationships may take up new connections and meanings, the micro level human processes have also become transformed to adapt to virtual capacities. People who would never have met at during a different technological era are now able to see each other and instantly communicate via the Internet (although we unfortunately do not have holographic projections yet). Not only that, a person who chooses to leave their homeland can remain in touch and informed without the same time lag that such distance would have imposed in the past. This increased ease of contact and general immediacy has implications for the global exchange and transfer of ideas and information, such as that of the role of the Internet in the proliferation of ideas on democracy and human rights. The role of ideas in society within the virtual space will be a function of the actors connected to it, of the nodes and connections that link them up, and of the potential for cross-network travel.

The questions about geography in virtual space could be summed up by the concept of the re-territorializing of knowledge that takes place in virtual space. Squirre (1996) brings up several questions such as:

“What power relationships shape electronic communities? How are social inequalities played out in electronic contexts and geographies of fear represented, negotiated, and potentially re-defined? How may electronic communications connect individuals with other societies, transforming social consciousness? And how might Internet activities create new geographies of leisure, recreation and tourism?”

The new realm of virtual space should “challenge geographers particularly to forge new understandings of ways of seeing and of being in multiple, and multi-faceted worlds” (Squire, 1996). A major goal of the sociology of associations could be to understand what within these relationships and connections have affected how ideas are connected through networks in virtual spaces and whom they are connected to, which in turn have impact on the assembling of society.

In the next part of this series, I’ll be discussing actor-network theory and virtual space together in more detail.

Literature cited

CASTELLS, M. 2010. The rise of the network society, Malden, MA, Wiley-Blackwell.

LATOUR, B. 2005. Reassembling the social-an introduction to actor-network-theory. Reassembling the Social-An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory, by Bruno Latour, pp. 316. Foreword by Bruno Latour. Oxford University Press, Sep 2005. ISBN-10: 0199256047. ISBN-13: 9780199256044, 1.

MERRIAM-WEBSTER. Idea – Definition and More [Online]. Merriam-Webster. Available: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/idea [Accessed 18 April 2013].

SQUIRE, S. J. 1996. Re-Territorializing Knowledge(s): Electronic Spaces and ‘Virtual Geographies’. Area, 28, 101-103.

Sometimes I wonder if I am more suited to the social sciences, but then I remember that I cannot understand their dense writing for the life of me. I’m interested in learning about concepts and theories, but I can’t digest writing that is convoluted, especially the ones that even those who are part of that field have a hard time deciphering.

The readings for this course have really challenged me and made me stretch my thinking power. We covered topics and dense writing that I had never been exposed to before or knew existed. The major themes that we covered were space and place, agency and structure, theories of difference, theorizing the city, governmentality and biopower, and performativity and subjectivity.

These are some of the well known authors that we read:
Doreen Massey
David Harvey
Michel Foucault
Judith Butler

I handed in my research paper for this class a few days ago, and I’m feeling glad that I took the plunge to take a course that was so far out of my normal range. I’m not sure how much will stay with me as I go back to ecology and biology, but I think it was an interesting exercise in exploring other disciplines. In the past, I’ve taken courses like philosophy of science, urban anthropology, and philosophy and film. Sometimes it takes something so different to bring in new perspective. What I chose to write about was actor-network theory and virtual space (in the form of the Internet to be specific) and the role of ideas in those spaces and contexts. Maybe I’ll post some snippets of it here!

One of the topics that I wrote about for a reaction paper was academic dependency. I think this is a very interesting phenomenon, especially now that I’m interacting more with the academic realm. The last section on performativity and subjectivity made me really think about myself and my identity. You could certainly say that as a scientist, you are expected to “perform” your role as an expert. Performance not in the evaluative sense like what grades you get or where you publish, but performance as in you are the performer and you are performing for an audience. From the perspective of performativity, this would mean performance is what makes you you. This is not saying that everyone is fake. Not at all, your performance of yourself is what makes you real.

How does this apply to science?

I think to really think about this in terms of science, we have to consider who scientists are performing for. At risk of oversimplifying, they are performing for the granting agencies, the academic journals, the department committees, least of all the general public. We may say that we are doing it for the common good, but at the end of the day the common good isn’t what brings in the funding. The pressure to perform to expectations has put so much pressure on researchers, that some have resorted to faking data and misrepresenting results in publications. It is regrettable, but it happens.

I think this largely occurs because they have lost sight of who/what should be the goal audience for their work, the common good. If you are not framing your research in terms of how it can improve current knowledge or improve how things are in the status quo, then what is the point? Not just framing your research, but the greater good should be the driving force for why the research should and is being done. Lying about results does good for no one.

What do you think? Is this social theory a bit too distant conceptually to be applicable to science?

One of the authors that I wrote about before, Nicky Gregson, is now working on science in practice. Though she doesn’t go into much detail about this project, she conducted an ethnography of a university science lab. It will be interesting to see what comes out of it!

Although very different in nature, the two research experiences of Gregson and Rose are interestingly relatable and insightful. The audience and the performer have different positions in the two settings. In the first, the participants of community art programs were the performers but the process was considered by the participants themselves to be more important than the audience. The participants were discovering and performing new parts of themselves through the process, and they did not see the end product as the most important part of the program. In the second, both participants in the car-boot sales were performing and both were the audience as well. The setting calls for a certain type of performance by the salespeople and the customers, some being more elaborate and others being simpler.

Perhaps one of the most important points of the article is that Gregson and Rose are quite self aware of their performance as part of academia. In the “Reflections” section of the paper, they discuss the somewhat ironic feeling that resulted from coming full circle from the fieldwork through to the writing of this paper. The authors found themselves changed by the process of performing academically. They recognize that the writing and publishing of papers is another type of power play in itself, and that the performance of the research itself was not fully complete until they came together to write this article.

Having started in a new school and campus several times, I could say that I have experienced changes or differences in the performance of myself in different spaces based on what I wish to present to classmates and friends (the audience). This could be an example of “self-cultivation” and “self-deployment,” where one can engage in cultivating identity “through multiple modalities of self” (Blackstock, 1997). This performativity of identity leads to diverse spatial performance. Even in a stable life with no new environments or audiences, I am performing different parts of myself in different contexts and spaces.

Perhaps the stereotyped thinking that people can travel the world to “find” themselves is just the releasing the pressure of needing to perform to a regular audience. When traveling, the traveler is constantly meeting new people and experiencing new environments that their performance can change accordingly. There is no historical evidence of a certain performance that ties you down to the expectations of the audience. This in itself can be freeing, where you can choose to deploy and depict the self you wish to.

Literature cited

BLACKSTOCK, C. G. 1997. Anne Bradstreet and Performativity: Self-Cultivation, Self-Deployment. Early American Literature, 32, 222-248.
GREGSON, N. & ROSE, G. 2000. Taking Butler elsewhere: performativities, spatialities and subjectivities. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 18, 433-452.

• You are less likely to fade into the crowd because the number of people starting at the same time as you will be much smaller. This might also mean that administrative staff will be less stretched thin than for the first semester of the academic year, but that might not be true.
• If you have a lot of coursework and/or teaching duties but have summers off in between semesters, starting during the second semester means that you have a bigger summer break in between your first 2 semesters to work on other important things like getting your preliminary research going and preparing for your qualifying examination. This could be a MAJOR advantage to consider since you would get this long break in the middle of your first year, as opposed to towards the end of it!
• Housing could go either way. There might be fewer options for on-campus housing but if you are looking for off-campus housing there might be less competition. This will greatly depend on where you are of course.

There are some disadvantages though, like having to keep telling people that you only just started if they assume that you have been around for a semester already. Another disadvantage might be that you don’t have as strong a bond with your cohort or as big a cohort that you start with and go through your program with, but assuming you have some social ability, I think you could overcome that within a few weeks of being in your lab group.

Alatas (2003) describes the dimensions of academic dependency as the dependence on ideas, media of ideas, technology of education, aid and investment, and dependence in the West for skills. The author brings up Project CAMELOT as an example that overtly implies both political and academic imperialism. Although it was quickly recognized as a mistake, government research agendas could be more open with their intentions, whether imperialistic or not. At present, the US government continues to fund research internationally which in some cases might be construed as somewhat imperialist, but proposal wording is thoroughly vetted to maintain political correctness (e.g. agriculture and food security, economic growth and trade, etc. (USAID 2013)). In the case of openness, the countries on the receiving end would at least be aware of the intentions and the implications.

Whether government research agendas of Western countries are displaying dominance overtly or not, the establishment of Yale-NUS and Duke-NUS in Singapore is proof that the West still dominates in many aspects of academics. This obvious and deliberate partnership between NUS and universities from a Western power country can be attributed at least in part to academic dependency if not majorly. Another example is how New York University (NYU) has also independently set up fully functional satellite campuses in several countries around the world, but the reverse does not seem to be happening. In addition to sharing research agendas, sharing authorship between researchers from developed and developing countries is now common practice. Dunkin found that authorship dynamics varied by discipline and between solo and multiple authorship just within University of Sydney (Dunkin 1992). It would be interesting to survey how the addition of Yale-NUS and Duke-NUS will change authorship dynamics among researchers in Singapore.

Alatas asks us to consider academic dependency a crippling handicap for the scientists in developing countries. It seems that one way to overcome this would be for those countries to look inward instead of Westward. However, it may be quite difficult to deviate from the current trajectory pushed by the West (and often pulled by non-West) because academic dependence is already so integrated and accepted and has been for quite some time. Research by the academically dependent on this topic would be greatly insightful for furthering understanding and would increase the awareness and reflection on this issue by all groups.

Literature Cited

Alatas, S. F. (2003). “Academic Dependency and the Global Division of Labour in the Social Sciences.” Current Sociology 51(6): 599-613.
Dunkin, M. (1992). “Some Dynamics of Authorship.” Australian Universities’ Review 35(1): 43-48.
USAID. (2013). “What We Do.” Retrieved 19 Feb, 2013, from http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do.

The author, Susan Cain, also gave a TED talk about this topic if you want the short version. The main idea is that even though a large proportion of people feel that they are introverts, there is still the cultural expectation to hid or minimize that part of yourself. A book that I read earlier last year, “Covering” by Kenji Yoshiro, talks a lot about social expectations and trying to “cover” some aspect of yourself that may be socially less desirable or acceptable in order to fit in or meet expectations. This is another example where people may feel the need to cover, to give off the impression of extroversion, in order to be normal socially.

As an introvert, I can enjoy attention, but that depends on the situation and I often feel embarrassed easily or awkward when responding to others. I can enjoy talking, but usually I don’t feel comfortable doing so unless I feel confident in what I want to say. I really enjoyed reading this book as a confirmation that my personality is not lacking just because I am more on the introverted side of the spectrum. I can be more outgoing, just usually with groups of people where I know at least some or most of the people.

There is also pressure to be more “assertive” to promote yourself and your own work, at least in the science and research world. It seems that this might not really change, but it helps to know that there are ways for introverts to handle it and hopefully maintain a balance of comfort level. In some cases, Cain describes how successful academics have “carved out restorative niches” for recovering after giving a big talk or going to a big conference.

Interestingly, many chapters of this book focus on advice that would be relevant to teachers and parents who are unsure of how to encourage and support a young introvert. The author talks about situations like what happens when an extroverted parent has an introverted child, and how can teachers create introvert-friendly environments in their classrooms and to buck the trend to idolize and reward extroverts.

This book has helped me greatly with coming to terms with a personal matter, a breakup that happened a few years ago. He realized he did not love me for who I was and was wishing me to be something that I am not: more extroverted. He could not understand why I didn’t feel the need to talk all the time when alone together, was disappointed by my lack of outgoingness at medium-ish size parties of people whom I knew none, and didn’t really get that I needed time to unwind and, more importantly, recover after a day at work. I may have also become more reclusive as the weather was getting colder (perhaps SAD related?), but for whatever reasons, it did not work out and I did not figure out until reading this book that it wasn’t because I wasn’t good enough in some way, but just that we were incompatible on this introvert-extrovert spectrum. It is ok and perfectly acceptable to be my introverted self, and someone will love me for it. In the end, no amount of trying to be more extroverted would have helped that relationship, and I should not have to.

I think there are some mixed reviews of this book, but I think it is a very well written book that every self-proclaimed introvert should read. Extroverts could use to read it too to better understand the perspective of the other side.

Despite having been written in 1998, more than a decade ago in real time and several times that in technology time, Kitchin brings up several points that still hold water today. Cyberspace has changed the face of global economics, as well as society, culture, and politics. Cyberspace as a term itself, however, is much outdated and may not accurately encompass all of the virtual space in the realm of the Internet. The Internet and the spaces related to it have now morphed into a range of things that integrate even more with physical spaces than they did before, especially with the adoption of smartphones and apps that make a larger range of interactions and processes possible.

The discussion on economic geographies of cyberspace is intriguing and it is interesting to note that not all industries have transitioned into a virtually dominated workspace. Decentralization has occurred and still occurs, but it is still the case that urban centers are growing in population size and much business still is based from those areas. In the technology sector, it is even more noticeable with certain urban areas being the main clustering of the largest players in the field (e.g. Microsoft and Amazon in Seattle, Google and Facebook in Palo Alto).

In addition to an urban-regional restructuring, it could be argued that there is also rural-regional restructuring. For example, the leapfrogging in Africa of landline telephones to mobile phones, which are now nearly ubiquitous, is inherently a different trajectory than what occurred elsewhere in the world. The hurdles that were present for the development of landlines were easily avoided by the uptake of mobile and satellite technology. News can travel through text messaging, bills can be paid, and transactions negotiated. The trajectory of telecommunications in Africa follows a distinctly different path than that of the Western world, which is another critical indication that globalization is a matter of being ahead or behind.

Kitchin concludes with thoughts on what areas require more research. There is also much debate on freedom of the flow of information, especially with governments getting involved with the regulation of how businesses conduct themselves online. Also, having spent much time in China where Internet is not free flowing, I wonder about the possible implications for freedom of speech and information. In particular, I find it interesting to think about the possibility of virtual justice such that unequal access to cyberspace will further divide groups.

In reading the article and this blog post, I was thinking, might there be a discrepancy between what survey respondents say they are looking for in candidates and what they actually choose when filling a position? After all, when it comes down to it the job advertisement is just a hook to try to get the right audience to sit up, pay attention, and get their CVs into the HR inbox in a timely manner. It is in the employer’s best interest to make it sound exciting to the right type of people, and certain keywords will incite interest in different kinds of people.

Interviewers may say they are looking for a number of skills from the top of the list, but nothing can replace a general feeling that you get from a person when meeting them and talking to them for the first time. How much is that feeling worth? Is it going to get you the job, or at least tip the scale in your favor? This is so intangible that we may never get a real sense for how it factors into the job seeking of hopeful graduates, but it is interesting to consider alongside the qualitative data that has been collected.

I think graduate students who are reading that paper and are thinking about their prospects for getting a job should be concerned with acquiring the skills that are highly valued for whichever sector they are aiming to get into. These skills include things like project management, IT, interpersonal, networking, written communication, etc. Some suggested ways to acquire these skills such as managing volunteers, or organizing an event or project. While I agree that these types of skills are important to develop, I also think that graduate students shouldn’t do this blindly. So what if you helped organize a graduate student congress, if you are just going to be blithe about it during an interview, it does not show much for your character or skills set. No one wants to hire someone who just does things to add them to their CV. People are naturally drawn to people who are passionate about what they have done or are doing!

Having just left the nonprofit sector to join PhD program, I can say that the things that nonprofit organizations value are accurately described by Blickley et al. (i.e. project management, program leadership, communication skills, and financial skills). This is in addition to research skills that you may have if you are recruited for a research position. Something that I did not realize before working there was that nonprofit researchers often have to manage their own grants, including filling out paperwork and taking care of budgets. This takes a chunk of time out of your day which may end up spilling over into non-working hours. Some people may end up working all the time to be able to take care of the more administrative side as well as being up on their research. Being able to juggle both aspects of the job can be crucial to surviving in the nonprofit sector.

In addition, I think what they really mean by communication skills, written communication, and interpersonal skills is having tact (besides having the basic skills of writing and speaking). It is important not to step on people’s toes, especially outside collaborators. It could really cost you your job if you say the wrong thing or piss off important contacts. It sucks to think that you have to be political when doing research or good works, but it is the truth and you have to acknowledge it!

I think another interesting thing that the authors note in the discussion is that most of the job advertisements that they analyzed were from the USA. There may be important cultural differences that would make this type of study give very different results. Having had just a little bit of time in Asia and having done just a little bit of reading (including the book titled “Quiet” by Susan Cain (book review to come soon!) and some social theory in a geographical context), I cannot say very much in the way of this, but my intuition is that interpersonal skills do not hold the same level of importance in “Eastern” cultures than in “Western” ones.

What are your thoughts? Do you think graduate students should pay attention to these or other tips?

The lab at NUS that I’ll be a part of is the Ecological Modeling and Economics lab, and at Imperial College London I’ll be at the Centre for Environmental Policy. For my research, I’m hoping to do some work on disease ecology and economics of trade that impact infectious disease emergence.

For my first semester here, I’m going to take a few courses on doing statistics in R, a graduate seminar in the Biological Sciences department, possibly a course at the School of Public Health on the control of communicable diseases. I’m also going to focus on a few courses on Coursera:

• Computing for Data Analysis
• Principles of Economics for Scientists
• Game Theory

The problem with Coursera is that too many of the courses that I’m interested in start all around the same time. It is hard enough to keep up with one course while working or studying full-time, so I’m not sure how if I’m going to succeed or if I’m going to have to give up a course or two and prioritize. I guess this might be because the professors who are doing these courses all go along similar academic calendars and this just seems to work for them this way.

Anyway, I will start posting more regularly again, especially as I start to ramp up reading of journal articles and taking the Coursera classes.

His approach to life is something that I aspire to. Although I’m not very physics-minded, it was cool to read about the work he’s done and get a glimpse into how his mind works. He always thought of things in practical terms, and especially when thinking about physics problems he would ask for a real life example to work through in his head. He is one of those people who just needs to know how things work, how they actually work. What about the things he has done for the military? He does talk about his time at Los Alamos, but mostly doesn’t go into the details of the physics or the gravity of what the work was.

One of the major concepts I like from him is that of cargo cult science and waiting for something to come that will never land. He explains it by going back to when tribes on desolate islands would be visited by cargo planes full of supplies and things they needed. The people would then become taken by the idea that some cargo plane will again come and give them what they need. So they wait around, build landing strips, for a plane that is not coming.

Deciding not to decide anymore

There is a part of the book that talks about when he was trying to decide between staying at Cornell or going to Caltech. The snow in Ithaca made him want to go to Caltech, and then there were some air pollution issues that made him think about going back to Cornell. Then he was stopped by some colleagues on campus who told him about their newest discoveries. He realized he wanted that type of environment where he could walk around and hear about all the different cool discoveries in other fields, and he decided would just stop deciding and stay at Caltech.

Reading this was great because I’m currently feeling a bit sheepish for going back on my plan to not do a PhD program. I’m deciding not to decide anymore about whether I want to do a PhD or not. It isn’t the years of hard work that I’m wary of, because anything I do I would want to work hard at it. It is the academic situation that I’m wary of (and lack of jobs on the traditional path following PhDs, but maybe I’m just not on a traditional path anymore anyway). What I will do is follow paths that feel right to me, and that lead to more interesting things. So, PhD programs in USA don’t feel right to me, at least not now. But, this other new opportunity does feel right to me. I would get to do interesting work, learn new skills, and do some living and traveling abroad. And no need to feel any anxiety, I don’t have to feel like I’m signing myself up for a life in academia, because only those who really want them get academic jobs and there are options outside of academia. I’m putting to rest these thoughts and just going to focus on what lies ahead.

In any case, Feynman definitely has had an interesting life and has inspired me to go out and do the things that I’ve been thinking about doing (like living abroad, and throwing myself into learning new skills)! I’ll go where curiosity takes me, and if this PhD position makes that possible, then so be it!