Abstract
Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess’s research activities have been noted for their organic proliferation in a variety of domains of inquiry. However, elements of his research have yet to be considered for their affinity with arts-related inquiry. This article seeks to address this omission by examining Naess’s empirical semantics in relation to recent literature in postdigital theory and practice, focusing on its relevance to contemporary studio arts and its potential applications to arts education at the post-secondary level. I will outline Naess’s theory of precization, a context-specific, dialogically generated system of conceptual and practical clarification, and describe its unique relevance to contemporary arts practices. Due to postdigital literature’s indebtedness to the work of C. S. Peirce, a brief description of Peirce’s concept of semiosis will further clarify the overlap between Naess’s research and the semiotically informed invocation of the postdigital in contemporary arts theory and practice. By blending analytical and gestalt-informed praxis, Naess’s work suggests the value of developing self-defined, heterogenous research methodologies within communities of critical dialogue. I will outline correspondences between Naess’s detailed-oriented yet holistic approach to research and the ecological orientations of semiotically informed postdigital inquiry and pedagogy, proposing the more-than-digital approach to meaning-making as a pluralist methodology in which creative artifacts evolve through agency to interpret, reimagine, and redirect.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Echoing evolutionary biological models as well as Spinoza’s concept of God as reflected in the innate generative capacity of all aspects of nature, Whitehead’s process philosophy offers a counterpoint to a view of a universe as a collection of static material entities, instead positing all aspects of the universe, including our biological form, consciousness, and ecological situatedness, as an infinite organic modulation of reciprocal influences across temporal, physical, and modal scales.
A likely avenue of influence is through Wittgenstein, whose statement ‘The world is the totality of facts, not of things’ (2009: 5) inspired Naess’s senior colleagues in the Vienna Circle (Rothenberg and Naess 1993: 21). Dörfler (2016: 27) notes the resonances between Peirce’s diagrammatic reasoning and Wittgenstein’s conception of ‘language games’ or ‘sign games’. Naess himself credits the metaphor of ‘depth’ (as in ‘deep ecology’ and ‘depth of intention’) to Wittgenstein’s description of ‘ordinary thinking’ as being like ‘swimming on the surface’ (Naess 1989: 12).
See, for example, Kennedy (2012) for an account of the radical pedagogical and administrative experimentation at NSCADU during this time.
Debriefing models in reflective practices (Driscoll 2007; Borton 1970; Schön 1992; Johns 1995; Brookfield 1993; Gibbs 1988) draw on the gestalt-influenced ‘T-Group’ or ‘Action Research’ of organizational theorist Kurt Lewin (1936/2013: 12; Highhouse 2002). Debriefing is not a performance evaluation process, but rather a dialogical process intended to promote democratic principles by allowing open discussion between diverse stakeholders.
References
Abakare, C. O. (2021). A critique of deep ecology. Indonesian Journal of Social and Educational Studies, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.26858/ijses.v2i1.22921.
Applin, J. (2016). Hard work: Lee Lozano's dropouts. October, 156(156), 75–99. https://doi.org/10.1162/OCTO_a_00252.
Aranda, J., Wood, K. B., & Vidokle, A. (2009). What is contemporary art? Issue one. e-flux journal 11. https://www.e-flux.com/journal/11/61342/what-is-contemporary-art-issue-one/.
Arsem, M. (2011). Some thoughts on teaching performance art in five parts. Total Art Journal 1(1). http://totalartjournal.com/archives/638/some-thoughts-on-teaching-performance-art-in-five-parts/. Accessed 4 March 2024.
Ayers, A. J. (2009). A reply to Arne Naess. In N. Witoszek & A. Brennan (Eds.), Philosophical Dialogues: Arne Naess and the Progress of Ecophilosophy (pp. 40–44). Lanham, MD: Bowman and Littlefield.
Berry, D., & Dieter, M. (2015). The Postdigital Constellation. In D. M. Berry & M. Dieter (Eds.), Postdigital Aesthetics: Art, Computation And Design (pp. 44–57). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137437204_4.
Borton, T. (1970). Reach, touch, and teach: Student concerns and process education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bowering, S. (2022). Zazen and Self as Environment. Religions, 13(2), 141. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13020141.
Bowering, S. (2023). Dimensions of practice: The skandhas as a gestalt-Informed framework for holistic approaches to post-secondary contemporary arts education. PhD Thesis. Burnaby, BC: Simon Fraser University. https://summit.sfu.ca/item/36455. Accessed 20 May 2024.
Brookfield, S. (1993). Through the lens of learning: How the visceral experience of learning reframes teaching. In D. Boud, R. Cohen, & D. Walker (Eds.), Using experience for learning (pp. 21-32). The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Campbell, C., & Olteanu, A. (2023). The challenge of postdigital literacy: Extending multimodality and social semiotics for a new age. Postdigital Science and Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-023-00414-8.
Cascone, K. (2000). The aesthetics of failure: ‘Post-digital’ tendencies in contemporary computer music. Computer Music Journal, 24(4), 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1162/014892600559489.
Cascone, K., & Jandrić, P. (2021). The Failure of Failure: Postdigital Aesthetics Against Techno-Mystification. Postdigital Science and Education, 3(2), 566-574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00209-1.
Christian, B. (2015). Scientific knowledge structured as “literature”. In J. Brockman (Ed.), This idea must die: Scientific theories that are blocking progress (pp. 375–378). New York: Harper Perennial.
Cox, G. (2015). Postscript on the Post-digital and the Problem of Temporality. In D. M. Berry & M. Dieter (Eds.), Postdigital Aesthetics: Art, Computation And Design (pp. 151-162). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137437204_12.
Cramer, F. (2014). What Is ‘Post-Digital’? A Peer-Reviewed Journal About, 3(1), 10–24. https://doi.org/10.7146/aprja.v3i1.116068.
Curtin, D. (1994). Dōgen, Deep Ecology, and the Ecological Self. Environmental Ethics, 16, 195–213.
Curtin, D. (2000). A state of mind like water: Ecosophy T and the Buddhist traditions. In E. Katz, A. Light, & D. Rothenberg (Eds.), Beneath the surface: critical essays in the philosophy of deep ecology (pp. 253-267). Cambridge; MA: The MIT Press.
De Courcy, M., & Todd, S. (2009). The Intermedia catalogue. The Michael de Courcy Archive. http://www.intermedia.vancouverartinthesixties.com/home/default. Accessed 29 May 2024.
Diehm, C. (2006). Arne Naess and the Task of Gestalt Ontology. Environmental Ethics, 28(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics200628137.
Dörfler, W. (2016). Signs and their use: Peirce and Wittgenstein. In Bikner-A. Ahsbahs (Ed.), Theories in and of Mathematics Education (pp. 21–30). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42589-4_4.
Driscoll, J. (2007). Supported reflective learning: the essence of clinical supervision? In J. Driscoll (Ed.), Practising Clinical Supervision: A Reflective Approach for Healthcare Professionals (pp. 27-50). Paris: Baillière Tindall.
Dumbadze, A., & Hudson, S. (Eds.). (2012). Contemporary art: 1989 to the present. John Wiley & Sons.
Fox, W. (1992). Intellectual Origins of the ‘depth theme in the philosophy of Arne Naess. The Trumpeter, 9(2).
Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Oxford: FEU, Oxford Brookes University.
Gibson, James J. (2015/1979). The Ecological approach to visual perception. Hove: Psychology Press.
Gourlay, L. (2024). More-than-digital meaning-making: Paratexts of the postdigital. Postdigital Science and Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-023-00449-x.
Heidegger, M. (1954/2008). The question concerning technology. In D. Krell (Ed.), Basic writings (pp. 311–341). New York: Harper Collins.
Highhouse, S. (2002). A history of the T-Group and its early applications in management development. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6(4), 277-290. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.6.4.277.
Irwin, R., with Simms, M. (2017). Notes toward a conditional art. Los Angeles,CA: J. Paul Getty Museum.
Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism, or, The cultural logic of late capitalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Johns, C. (1995). The value of reflective practice for nursing. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 4(1), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.1995.tb00006.x.
Kennedy, G. N. (2012). The last art college: Nova Scotia college of art and design, 1968–1978. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Klein, K. (2021). Post-digital, post-internet: Propositions for art education in the context of digital cultures. In K. Tavin, G. Kolb, & J. Tervo (Eds.), Post-digital, post-internet art and education (pp. 27–43). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73770-2_2.
Kohn, A., & Blum, S. D. (2020). Ungrading: Why rating students undermines learning (and what to do instead). Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Press.
Leja, M. (2002). Peirce's visuality and the semiotics of art. In P. Smith & C. Wilde (Eds.), A companion to art theory (pp. 303-316). John Wiley & Sons.
Lewin, K. (1936/2013). Principles of topological psychology. Read Books Ltd.
LeWitt, S. (1999). Sentences on conceptual art. In A. Alberro & B. Stimson (Eds.), Conceptual art: A critical anthology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Maran, T. (2014). Biosemiotic Criticism. In G. Garrard (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ecocriticism (pp. 260–275). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199742929.013.008.
Marxen, E. (2009). Therapeutic thinking in contemporary art or psychotherapy in the arts. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 36(3), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2008.10.004.
Murphy, T. (2014). Experimental Philosophy: 1935–1965. In T. Lombrozo, J. Knobe, & S. Nichols (Eds.), Oxford Studies in Experimental Philosophy (pp. 325–368). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198718765.003.0013.
Naess, A. (1949). Toward a theory of interpretation and preciseness. Theoria, 15(1‐3), 220-241.
Naess, A. (1953/2005a). Interpretation and preciseness. In A. Drengson, & H. Glasser (Eds.), The selected works of Arne Naess volumes 1–10 (pp. 5–523). Springer.
Naess, A. (1964). Reflections about total views. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 25(1), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.2307/2105501.
Naess, A. (1966). Communication and argument: Elements of applied semantics. Trans. A. Hannay. New York: Bedminster Press.
Naess, A. (1972). The pluralist and possibilist aspect of the scientific enterprise. Universitetsforlaget.
Naess, A. (1974). Gandhi and group conflict: An exploration of satyagraha, theoretical background. Universitetsforlaget.
Naess, A. (1989). Ecology, community and lifestyle: Outline of an ecosophy. Trans. & Ed. D. Rothenberg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Naess, A. (2005b). Self-Realization: An ecological approach to being in the world. In A. Drengson, & H. Glasser (Eds.), The selected works of Arne Naess volumes 1–10 (pp. 515–530). Springer.
Naess, A. (2005c). The apron diagram. In A. Drengson, & H. Glasser (Eds.), The selected works of Arne Naess volumes 1–10 (pp. 75–81). Springer.
Naess, A. (2005d). Notes on methodology and normative systems. In A. Drengson, & H. Glasser (Eds.), The selected works of Arne Naess volumes 1–10 (pp. 483–497). Springer.
Naess, A. (2005e). Cultures construed as all-embracing systems. In A. Drengson, & H. Glasser (Eds.), The selected works of Arne Naess volumes 1–10 (pp. 105–142). Springer.
Naess, A. (2005f). Cultures construed as all-embracing systems. In A. Drengson, & H. Glasser (Eds.), The selected works of Arne Naess volumes 1–10 (pp. 449–460). Springer.
Nagy, E. E. (2016). The industrial connections in Donald Judd's art. Studies in conservation 61(S2), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/00393630.2016.1181316.
Osborne. P. (2010). Contemporary art is post-conceptual art. Public Lecture, Fondazione Antonio Ratti, Villa Sucota, Como, 9 July 2010. https://api.fondazioneratti.org/assets/PDFs/XVI-CSAV_Lectures/Leggi-il-testo-della-conferenza-di-Peter-Osborne-in-PDF1.pdf. Accessed 29 May 2024.
Osborne, P. (2011). The Politics of Time: Modernity and Avant-Garde. London: Verso Books.
Peirce, C. S. (1906). Prolegomena to an apology for pragmaticism. The Monist, 16(4), 492–546. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27899680.
Pólya, G. (1957). How to solve it ; a new aspect of mathematical method. 2nd Ed. New York: Doubleday.
Radler, J. (2011). Arne Naess’s meta-philosophy: From ‘empirical semantics’ to ‘deep ecology’. Baltic Journal of European Studies, 1(1), 125-138.
Reinhardt, A., with Rose, B. (1975). In B. Rose (Ed.), Art-as-art: The selected writings of Ad Reinhardt. New York: Viking Press.
Ringger, K. (2014). Deconstruction, abjection, and meaning in contemporary art: World trends and the BYU Museum of Art. BYU Studies Quarterly, 53(1), 152-167.
Romanycia, M. H. J., & Pelletier, F. J. (1985). What is a heuristic? Computational Intelligence, 1(1), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8640.1985.tb00058.x.
Rothenberg, D., & Naess, A. (1993). Is it painful to think?: Conversations with Arne Naess. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Schimmel, P., Noever, P., & Stiles, K. (1998). Out of actions: Between performance and the object, 1949-1979. London: Thames & Hudson.
Schön, D. A. (1992). The Reflective practitioner. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473.
Serra, R. (2011). Interview with Richard Serra: San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. [YouTube Video]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Cs2QgfxFnk. Accessed 29 May 2024.
Short, T. L. (2007). Peirce's Theory of Signs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511498350.012.
Sinclair, C., & Hayes, S. (2019). Between the post and the com-post: Examining the postdigital “work” of a prefix. Postdigital Science and Education, 1(1), 119–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-018-0017-4.
Stables, A., & Olteanu, A. (2023). Semiotics in learning and education. In J. Pelkey, S. Pegtrilli, & S. M. Ricciardone (Eds.), Bloomsbury semiotics volume 3: semiotics in the arts and social sciences (pp. 129-148). New York: Bloomsbury. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350139398.
Uhlin, G. (2010). TV, time, and the films of Andy Warhol. Cinema Journal, 49(3), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1353/cj.0.0205.
Weschler, L. (2008). Seeing is forgetting the name of the thing one sees: Over thirty years of conversations with Robert Irwin. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Whitehead, A. N. (1929/1978). Process and reality: Corrected edition. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Whitehead, A. N. (1968/1938). Modes of thought. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (2009). Major Works: Selected Philosophical Writings. New York: Harper Collins.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Bowering, S. Naess’s Empirical Semantics and Postdigital Design Agency in Contemporary Studio Arts Education. Postdigit Sci Educ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-024-00480-6
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-024-00480-6