Re-reading Garfinkel’s 1967 _Studies in Ethnomethodology_ and finding it hugely easier than on my first time through in 1987. I’ve learned and changed since then, but also— so have the times. What was almost incomprehensibly alien then is directly relevant to our now.
-
Show this thread
-
This should be ethnomethodology’s hour. Garfinkel was half a century ahead of his time, a prophet of metamodernity. The field he left behind needs a hundred-thousand-volt jolt of electricity to restart its hearthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPmVhyHBRAM …
1 reply 2 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
(Not to discount or denigrate any of the great work that *is* being done in the field, notably by a new generation. It’s just that so much more is possible)
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @Meaningness
This missive by Anderson & Sharrock also talks about the need to defibrillate EM, but IMO the root problem is more widespread than it having "run its course" (c.f. incentive structures & legacy cruft in science more generally) http://www.sharrockandanderson.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Run-its-Course-VII.pdf …
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @saul @Meaningness
There have been 2-3 lost generations of jobless or EM-dissimulating PhDs between Garfinkel's students and the current minor resurgence via Medical em/CA (because hey - applied CA *works*), but EM is still viewed as nonsense, or at least nonscience re: current scientistic norms.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @saul @Meaningness
Having just completed one extremely lucky round on the job market and seeing the situation my
#EMCA PhD peers face, imo the field really needs major EM/CA research centers, grants and jobs - I'm betting your old field of AI might host that push, if only due to desperation ;)1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @saul
Yes, definitely more funding and institutional support needed. Chicken-and-egg problem there of demonstrating value (or at least potential value) with minimal resources. But also insularity and oppositional attitude of the field (historically) is an obstacle (however justified).
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @saul
The amount of funding being (supposedly at least) funneled to AI is utterly mind-boggling, and if even .001 of it were diverted to something worthwhile, that would be fabulous and enough to create major breakthroughs in several fields.
3 replies 2 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @saul
Unfortunately “AI” currently means “image classification using texture matching,” and it seems difficult to make a case that EM would help with that. Maybe once that hype cycle is exhausted, the definition of “AI” will open up enough that EM may again seem relevant.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
EM is more obviously relevant to UX, and of course there’s a tradition of application there. UX doesn’t get the respect it deserves… I suppose funding is scarce even for UX research, never mind EM-for-UX research?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.