Originally published as: Ulrich Herb (2016). Wissenschaftsjournale: Boykott, Verhandlungen und Vorwurf des Missbrauchs der Marktmacht.

There’s an article doing the rounds today about public understanding and rejection of experts and expertise. It was discussed in an article in the THES late last year (which ironically I haven’t read). I recommend reading the original article by Scharrer and co-workers, not least because the article itself is about how reading lay summaries can lead to a discounting of expertise.

This post is aiming to get down some thoughts around how the superset of evolutionary models can be framed. It’s almost certainly work that has been done somewhere before but I’m struggling to find it so it seemed useful to lay out what I’m looking for. Evolutionary models are extraordinarily powerful, in part because they are extremely flexible.

Bibliotheken managen nicht nur den Bestand, sondern sie sind auch Ort, an dem Menschen miteinander kommunizieren. Die Fachliteratur thematisiert dies eher eng, vor allem als Informationsbedarfsgespräch, bei dem vorausgesetzt wird, dass die Nutzerinnen und Nutzer auch alle mit einem klar erfragbaren Interesse in die Bibliothek kommen. Aber ist dies die einzige Situationen, in denen Personal und Bibliotheksnutzern miteinander kommunzieren?

This is the first pass at an introductory chapter for a book I’ve had in my head to work on for a long time. The idea is that it relates some of personal history shifting from my grounding science towards the humanities, while interleaving this with a survey of the theoretical work that develops those different perspectives. This is just a first draft written on a Sunday afternoon.

Eine Notiz von Ben Kaden (@bkaden) (Achtung: enthält Spoiler .) zu: Jonathan Franzen (2015): Purity: a novel . [First Picador International Mass Market Edition: August 2016] New York: Picador. “Franzen reveals moments of absolute genius.” notierte das Library Journal 2015 über Purity.

Eine Anmerkung von Ben Kaden (@bkaden) zu Uwe Jochum: Digitale Wissenschaftskontrolle . In: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 23.11.2016, S. N4 Peter Geimer: Jede Ähnlichkeit wäre rein zufällig . In: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 23.11.2016, S. 9 Sowohl Feuilleton wie auch der Wissenschaftsteil der Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung unterstreichen mit der aktuellen Themenwahl erneut, wie nachdrücklich sich das Blatt als

I had a dream, which was not all a dream. The bright sun was extinguish’d, and the stars Did wander darkling in the eternal space, Rayless, and pathless, and the icy earth Swung blind and blackening in the moonless air;

Amongst all the hot takes, the disbelief and the angst the question many of us are asking is what to actually do. I don’t have answers to that question, or rather I have lots of answers and no clarity as to which to choose. An inventory of resources reveals this blog, a substantial, if not massive, social media following on Twitter and some degree of influence associated with that.

Like many people over the past week, and months, I’ve had some cause to reflect on what it is I do, and why. A lot of that circles around an issue that’s been troubling me for a while, how do you simultaneously acknowledge a personal and historical failure to act and credibly and coherently move to change that. How can I know when to challenge and when to shut up and listen – because its not always immediately obvious.