Ghost and self: Jung's paradigm shift and a response to Zinkin

Zinkin's lucid challenge to Jung makes perfect sense. Indeed, it is the implications of this `making sense' that this paper addresses. For Zinkin's characterization of the `self' takes it as a `concept' requiring coherence; a variety of abstract non-contextual knowledge that itself has a mythical heritage. Moreover, Zinkin's refinement of Jung seeks to make his work fit for the scientific paradigm of modernity. In turn, modernity's paradigm owes much to Newton's notion of knowledge via reductionism. Here knowledge or investigation is divided up into the smallest possible units with the aim of eventually putting it all together into `one' picture of scientific truth. Unfortunately, `reductionism' does not do justice to the resonant possibilities of Jung's writing. These look forward to a new scientific paradigm of the twenty-first century, of the interactive `field', emergence and complexity theory. The paper works paradoxically by discovering Zinkin's `intersubjective self' after all, in two undervalued narratives by Jung, his doctoral thesis and a short late ghost story. However, in the ambivalences and radical fictional experimentation of these fascinating texts can be discerned an-Other self, one both created and found. [From the Publisher]

Emergence: a paradigm for robust and scalable distributed applications

Natural distributed systems are adaptive, scalable and fault-tolerant. Emergence science describes how higher-level self-regulatory behaviour arises in natural systems from many participants following simple rulesets. Emergence advocates simple communication models, autonomy and independence, enhancing robustness and self-stabilization. High-quality distributed applications such as autonomic systems must satisfy the appropriate nonfunctional requirements which include scalability, efficiency, robustness, low-latency and stability. However the traditional design of distributed applications, especially in terms of the communication strategies employed, can introduce compromises between these characteristics. This paper discusses ways in which emergence science can be applied to distributed computing, avoiding some of the compromises associated with traditionally-designed applications. To demonstrate the effectiveness of this paradigm, an emergent election algorithm is described and its performance evaluated. The design incorporates nondeterministic behaviour. The resulting algorithm has very low communication complexity, and is simultaneously very stable, scalable and robust.

When the shift hits the critical fan: a Foucauldian analysis

In the past 15 years in the UK, the state has acquired powers, which mark a qualitative shift in its relationship to higher education. Since the introduction and implementation of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992, the Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998 and the Higher Education Act 2004, a whole raft of changes have occurred which include the following: Widening participation; the development of interdisciplinary, experiential and workplace-based learning focused on a theory-practice dialogue; quality assurance; and new funding models which encompass public and private partnerships. The transformation of higher education can be placed in the context of New Labour’s overall strategies for overarching reform of public services, as set out in the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit’s discussion paper The UK Government’s Approach to Public Service Reform (2006). An optimistic view of changes to higher education is that they simultaneously obey democratic and economic imperatives. There is an avowed commitment through the widening participation agenda to social inclusion and citizenship, and to providing the changing skills base necessary for the global economy. A more cynical view is that, when put under critical scrutiny, as well as being emancipatory, in some senses these changes can be seen to mobilise regulatory and disciplinary practices. This paper reflects on what kinds of teaching and learning are promoted by the new relationship between the state and the university. It argues that, whilst governmental directives for innovations and transformations in teaching and learning allegedly empower students and put their interests at the centre, reforms can also be seen to consist of supervisory and controlling mechanisms with regard both to our own practices as teachers and the knowledge/ learning we provide for the students.