“…The farther any given item (real or imagined) is removed from the self in the here and now, the bigger its perceived subjective distance is. It is important to highlight at this point that various items can be distanced from one's self either in surrounding reality (a person moving away from me), or in one's ‘mind eye.’ (, p. 250)…”
Section: Post‐phenomenological Spacementioning
confidence: 98%
“…From a phenomenological perspective, distanciation is a process through which space appears to human beings in terms of relations of near and far. Simandan () defines distanciation through the notion of a self. Here,the reference point of distance for any given individual is their self in the here and now.…”
Post‐phenomenological geographies have critiqued the idea that the world appears for humans alone. In turn, these geographies have begun to develop concepts to investigate the way entities appear to one another in ways that exceed or confound human sense, while recognising that these entities can only be investigated through human modes of access. Addressing the absence of explicit spatial theorisation in this literature, the paper develops a post‐phenomenological account of space. Building on relational and phenomenological geographies and expanding the work of Tristan Garcia, the paper analyses space in terms of the comprehension and form of entities. In doing so, it defines space as a dual process of differentiation and distanciation that produces different modes of nearness and farness that are specific to the intercomprehension of particular entities. Through this analysis the paper offers an account of power as tied to the spatiality of entities, where power is defined as the inequality of comprehensions between entities and how these inequalities are designed to provoke and encourage particular forms of engagement.
“…The farther any given item (real or imagined) is removed from the self in the here and now, the bigger its perceived subjective distance is. It is important to highlight at this point that various items can be distanced from one's self either in surrounding reality (a person moving away from me), or in one's ‘mind eye.’ (, p. 250)…”
Section: Post‐phenomenological Spacementioning
confidence: 98%
“…From a phenomenological perspective, distanciation is a process through which space appears to human beings in terms of relations of near and far. Simandan () defines distanciation through the notion of a self. Here,the reference point of distance for any given individual is their self in the here and now.…”
Post‐phenomenological geographies have critiqued the idea that the world appears for humans alone. In turn, these geographies have begun to develop concepts to investigate the way entities appear to one another in ways that exceed or confound human sense, while recognising that these entities can only be investigated through human modes of access. Addressing the absence of explicit spatial theorisation in this literature, the paper develops a post‐phenomenological account of space. Building on relational and phenomenological geographies and expanding the work of Tristan Garcia, the paper analyses space in terms of the comprehension and form of entities. In doing so, it defines space as a dual process of differentiation and distanciation that produces different modes of nearness and farness that are specific to the intercomprehension of particular entities. Through this analysis the paper offers an account of power as tied to the spatiality of entities, where power is defined as the inequality of comprehensions between entities and how these inequalities are designed to provoke and encourage particular forms of engagement.
“…Simandan characterises 4 four entangled dimensions of distance: spatial distance; temporal distance; social distance; and hypothetical distance. While distance has long been a central focus for the quantitative, spatial science tradition in geography, Simandan (2016) argues for a reconstruction of distance by subjectifying it, that is, by focusing on the subjective experiencing of distance. Such a reconstruction would align with the centrality of human subjects now core to the practice of human geography.…”
There is currently no generally accepted definition for the “blue economy,” despite the term becoming common parlance over the past decade. The concept and practice have spawned a rich, and diverse, body of scholarly activity. Yet despite this emerging body of literature, there is ambiguity around what the blue economy is, what it encapsulates, and its practices. Thus far, the existing literature has failed to theorise key geographical concepts such as space, place, scale, and power relations, all of which have the potential to lead to uneven development processes and regional differentiation. Previous research has sought to clarify the ontological separation of land and sea or has conceptualised the blue economy as a complex governmental project that opens up new governable spaces and rationalises particular ways of managing marine and coastal regions. More recently, geographers have called for a critical—and practical—engagement with the blue economy. This paper critically examines the existing literature of the geographies of the blue economy through a structured meta‐analysis of published work, specifically its conceptualisations and applications to debates in the field. Results offer the potential to ground a bottom‐up definition of the blue economy. In so doing, this paper provides a clearly identifiable rubric of the key geographical concepts that are often overlooked by researchers, policymakers, and practitioners when promoting economic development and technological innovation in coastal and marine environments.
“…It is not ethereal selves or souls who make meaning, but our brains. This disenchanted anti‐humanist view of meaning‐making opens up new possibilities for understanding space, distance, place and the geography of becoming (Ash and Simpson ; May and Thrift ; Simandan ; Wright et al . ).…”
Section: Bodies Without Soulsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reason demonic geography refuses to discount representations is two‐fold. First, the totality of available scientific evidence from cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and the field of judgment and decision‐making shows that various types of representations (concepts, beliefs, attitudes, mental models, narratives and scripts, images) are fundamental variables in the explanation of why, what and how humans decide, feel and act (Komer and Eliasmith ; Simandan ). Second, demonic geography provides an account of representations that is fully materialistic, causal and mechanistic: representations are (ever‐evolving) populations of neurons and their inhibitory or excitatory synaptic connections (Thagard ).…”
Demonic geography is an approach to practising human geography that operates from the premise that there are no such immaterial entities as ‘souls’, ‘spirits’, ‘minds’, integrated stable ‘selves’ or conscious ‘free will’. This paper elaborates the theoretical framework of demonic geography by spelling out how it is different from non‐representational theory and by articulating it within recent developments in experimental psychology, neuroscience and the philosophy of mind. Counterintuitively, the paper shows that the deflationary, materialistic ontology of human nature espoused by demonic geography need not lead to meaninglessness, unhappiness or the collapse of moral behaviour. Instead, subscribing to demonic geography opens up new ways to find meaning, to pursue happiness and to live the good life.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
