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

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Of spheres and squares : can Sloterdijk help us rethink the architecture of climate science? / Skrydstrup, Martin.

In: Social Studies of Science, Vol. 46, No. 6, 2016, p. 854–876.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Skrydstrup, M 2016, 'Of spheres and squares: can Sloterdijk help us rethink the architecture of climate science?', Social Studies of Science, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 854–876. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312716647214

APA

Skrydstrup, M. (2016). Of spheres and squares: can Sloterdijk help us rethink the architecture of climate science? Social Studies of Science, 46(6), 854–876. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312716647214

Vancouver

Skrydstrup M. Of spheres and squares: can Sloterdijk help us rethink the architecture of climate science? Social Studies of Science. 2016;46(6):854–876. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312716647214

Author

Skrydstrup, Martin. / Of spheres and squares : can Sloterdijk help us rethink the architecture of climate science?. In: Social Studies of Science. 2016 ; Vol. 46, No. 6. pp. 854–876.

Bibtex

@article{5e929beeab2144d4875790f9c97ac210,
title = "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{\textquoteright}s {\textquoteleft}spherology{\textquoteright} 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{\textquoteright}s ideas of a {\textquoteleft}new nature{\textquoteright} and {\textquoteleft}scalar connections{\textquoteright} 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{\textquoteright}s notion of {\textquoteleft}Spaceship Earth{\textquoteright}, 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{\textquoteright}s spherology may serve as a point of departure for rethinking the aesthetic grammar of the architecture of science. ",
author = "Martin Skrydstrup",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1177/0306312716647214",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "854–876",
journal = "Social Studies of Science",
issn = "0306-3127",
publisher = "SAGE Publications",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Of spheres and squares

T2 - can Sloterdijk help us rethink the architecture of climate science?

AU - Skrydstrup, Martin

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

U2 - 10.1177/0306312716647214

DO - 10.1177/0306312716647214

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 28025912

VL - 46

SP - 854

EP - 876

JO - Social Studies of Science

JF - Social Studies of Science

SN - 0306-3127

IS - 6

ER -

ID: 162378893