tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6489189090051303937.post4583449542953019825..comments2023-11-03T07:36:17.360+00:00Comments on K I P W O R L D : (The Grand Theory of) Neo EmotivismKip Joneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14404122174671702725noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6489189090051303937.post-59006299615309116302015-10-13T09:44:36.993+01:002015-10-13T09:44:36.993+01:00... neo-emotivism sounds weird. but now i see! my ...... neo-emotivism sounds weird. but now i see! my work is on subcultures, for the most part. i focus on rituals + collective rituals, and identity. how rituals manifest themselves now and why.. but really about the act of surrendering ones identity to the collective. taking different exclusive groups, breaking them down, and creating a new collective identity that's inclusive by default. <br /><br />most of my research is on the trance subculture [within electronic dance subcultures], but have also just finished a project on star trek subculture + fandom. it reminds me somewhat of aca-fandom, i'd love to hear your take on that if possible. i struggle with aca-fandom somewhat. the term implies i'm a fan which feels a bit too subjective. even if i am a fan, it's only more reason to remain objective. but so much is lost when you take yourself out of the equation. the best, most honest and productive interviews i get occur only when i manage to connect emotionally or empathize with the person. a lot of the times this leads to engagements i couldn't have anticipated or known what to ask to get there. however, many of these loose value if i fail to describe my experience of the engagement. taken out of context for scientific purposes creates a nice objective, safe and controlled environment for the study. but it also leaves this huge blindspot that clouds the big picture. aca-fandom is a nice term. but i'd like to believe my theories would be just as valid whether i am a fan or not. <br /><br />connecting on a more emotional level is nothing more than a technique calculated to prove one thing or another. how this is done, what stories are told, how the bond occurred, are all extremely important pieces of the puzzle. we didn't bond because we both love captain picard, but my confession invites more detailed accounts the subject might've thought irrelevant to bring up without it. does it even matter if i am a fan at all as long as i use neo-emotivism to get on the same page as my subject? i think not. jenkins might disagree..<br /><br />anyway, awesome read. helps me tie loose ends and sparks up lots of new possibilities :)inesmaria muniz suarezhttps://about.me/inesmariamunizsuareznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6489189090051303937.post-74729471871182651642014-09-18T17:38:51.694+01:002014-09-18T17:38:51.694+01:00Yes. Kip, I have managed to live in the epistemol...Yes. Kip, I have managed to live in the epistemological interstices my entire academic career. Educated first as a bench biologist at University of London and Leeds, , then 20 years working with Carl Rogers in the US, where I now live, and having no talent as an artist, I have made do with living in multiple frames and making my psychological observations from the inside out. . Neo-emotivism is a mouthful, but I'll play with it. I have no doubt (but many doubts, of course) that we are at point in the history of western civilization where over reliance on the cognitive, formal, rational, objective, and quantitative epistemologies is killing us and everything else. I will follow your blog. Maureen O'Haranoreply@blogger.com