Neomaterialism & Anthropo-logics
This article is proposed as an academic debate, about a recently published article by a relevant author in the field of Communication. Two nested components are observed in the discussed article: one, propositional, which is academically valued; and a combat one, where contradictions with the first...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2020 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) |
| Repositorio: | Galáxia (São Paulo) |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/48186 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/galaxia/article/view/48186 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Neomaterialism Anthropocentrism Affordances Social Communication. Neomaterialismo. Antropocentrismo. Affordances. Comunicação social |
| Sumario: | This article is proposed as an academic debate, about a recently published article by a relevant author in the field of Communication. Two nested components are observed in the discussed article: one, propositional, which is academically valued; and a combat one, where contradictions with the first component show up. The expression anthropocentrism is debated as used to characterize researches nonaligned with the heuristic proposal offered by the author. The disqualification of opponents so constructed does not favor the heuristic itself – which, however, offers a good contribution to the area. Finally, based on the concept of affordances and on the perception of diversity of objects and research in Communication, we propose the reception of the heuristic as a middle range theory. |
|---|