Of spheres and squares: Can Sloterdijk help us rethink the architecture of climate science?

Abstract

This article explores how different visions and values of science translate into different architectural shapes. I bring Peter Sloterdijk's 'spherology' to bear on my ethnographic fieldwork at the NEEM ice core base in Greenland, a significant node in the global infrastructure of climate science. I argue that the visual form of the geodesic dome of the camp materializes specific values and visions of this branch of paleoclimate science, which I elaborate vis-a-vis the pragmatic claims of the scientists/designers and the particular architectural history of Danish ice core drilling in Greenland. I argue that this aesthetic history articulates with Buckminster Fuller's ideas of a 'new nature' and 'scalar connections' encapsulated in his geodesic form. Second, I argue that the aesthetic production of space in the camp replicates the modern distinction between science and society, in so far as the lab space is rectangular and the recreational space is spherical. Third, I argue that NEEM scientists and Sloterdijk are essentially engaged in a common project: the scientists work hard to align air bubbles in the cores with atmospheric fluctuations in the hemisphere on the evidentiary terrain of ice, and Sloterdijk attempts to connect micro-uteri with macro-uteri in an attempt to fundamentally rethink space. Fuller's notion of 'Spaceship Earth', appropriated by Sloterdijk in his thinking about anthropogenic climate change, lends itself well to capturing the scalar alignments and the isolated NEEM base - on a mission to save planet Earth. In conclusion, I argue that Sloterdijk's spherology may serve as a point of departure for rethinking the aesthetic grammar of the architecture of science.

Atmospheres of science: Experiencing scientific mobility

“…Air, Gandy (2017: 257) writes, 'is streaked with possibilities or "threads" exemplified by olfactory patterns, pressure gradients, and other endlessly changing meteorological phenomena' (see also McCormack, 2008). Atmosphere thus becomes something that exceeds local 'atmo-spheres' (Anderson, 2009) and that is constituted through threads or tendrils, even becoming points within networks (Latour, 2013;Skrydstrup, 2016). As with Tsing's (2005) search for how universals become specific, atmospheres are simultaneously local and global, taking on meaning and character through the connections they have to wider dynamics.…”

Die Verschränkung von Umwelt und Wohnwelt – Grüne <i>smart homes</i> aus der Perspektive der pluralen Sphärologie

“…6 Sloterdijk identifiziert mehrere "Stufen" der historischen Problematisierung von Wohnbehausungen, die in der Moderne schließlich in einer vollständigen "Umkehrung der Beziehung zwischen Vordergrund und Hintergrund hinsichtlich der menschlichen Beherbergungsverhältnisse" (Sloterdijk, 2004:503) (Sloterdijk, 2009b) ins Englische übersetzt worden, nach dem Thema Wohnen aber sucht man im Themenheft vergeblich. Zudem gibt es zwar eine ausführliche Beschäftigung mit Sloterdijks Architekturtheorie (Borch, 2008;Skrydstrup, 2016), aber auch hier geht es eher ums Bauen, Entwerfen und Planen als um die Existenzweisen des Wohnens. 7 Sloterdijk folgt der phänomenologischen Tradition, insofern er Wohnen als existenzielle Seinsweise des Menschen begreift.…”

“…So berechtigt das öffentliche SloterdijkBashing ist (Brumlik, 2016;Honneth, 2009;Menke, 2009;Münkler, 2016), es droht doch stets die produktiven Impulse zu übersehen, die von seinen Arbeiten ausgehen. So ist es kein Zufall, dass eine ernsthafte und produktive Auseinandersetzung mit Sloterdijk bisher vor allem im Ausland erfolgt ist (Borch, 2008(Borch, , 2010Skrydstrup, 2016;Klauser, 2010;El-80 A. Folkers und N. Marquardt: Die Verschränkung von Umwelt und Wohnwelt -Grüne smart homes den und Mendieta, 2009), das nicht in der gleichen Weise von den öffentlichen Einlassungen Sloterdijks behelligt wird, während es im deutschsprachigen Kontext umso schwieriger ist, Widersprüche und Grenzen in Sloterdijks Denken oder Friktionen zwischen öffentlicher und philosophischer Person etc. aufzuzeigen.…”

Epistemic geographies of climate change

“…Ramírez-i-Ollé, 2015; also Schinkel, 2016). Martin Skrydstrup uses Sloterdijk’s spherology (see Van Tuinen, 2009) to examine the architectural grammars of ice core drilling sites, interpreting Greenland’s NEEM station as ‘a modern micro-cosmos, anticipating and building within itself the very sense of a global ecumene to which its scientific work ultimately is addressed’ (Skrydstrup, 2016: 14). The project of producing scalar correspondence between the field and the global is not just epistemological, but cosmo-political.…”

“…In contrast, Howe (2014) recounts efforts at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado, to inculcate a particularly collaborative, experimental research culture through architecture, with a building designed, like the NEEM station, to ease interpersonal interactions (Skrydstrup, 2016). NCAR’s veritable revolving door of visiting scientists can be read as a response to an environment wherein atmospheric scientists were wary of co-optation into Cold War research structures, with the institution’s relative autonomy and lively circulation of scientists a form of resistance to the increasingly centralizing tendencies of US science policy (see also Bassi, 2015).…”