English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Artiklen argumenterer for, at eksperimenterende skrivepraksisser inden for en humanistisk forskningshorisont er fravaerende, men onskvaerdige. Afsaettet tages i en diagnose af det, der ses som en beklagelig og omfattende tendens i tidens humanistiske forskning: at den skal kunne omsaettes restlost til/via formidling. Forfatternes tese er, at formidlingsfokuseringen har fjernet muligheden for at sporge til udsigelsens egne betingelser, hvilket har medfort en ”traethed i taenkningen” og ”egolast sagprosa”. Artiklen relancerer tre udsigelsesstrategier (pseudonymitet, anonymitet og kollektivitet) for at vise, hvordan humanistisk forskning kan vaere andet end blot formidling af viden, men ogsa kan udfordre, hvordan der overhovedet taenkes. Artiklens begreb om udsigelse hentes fra korte nedslag i Jacques Lacan-inspireret psykoanalyse. Analytisk tages der udgangspunkt i den danske taenketank Center for Vild Analyse, der fra 2006 har arbejdet med forskellige mader, hvorpa man kan uvaesentliggore afsenderidentiteten. Abstract The article argues that experimental writing practices in humanistic research are absent but desirable. The starting point is a diagnosis of an unfortunate and extensive tendency in today’s humanistic research: that it must be restlessly translated into/through popular dissemination. The authors' thesis is that the focus on popular dissemination of research results has removed the possibility of questioning the conditions of the enunciation itself, which has brought about a “fatigue in thinking” and “ego-limited prose”. The article revitalizes three strategies of enunciation (pseudonymity, anonymity and collectivity) to show how humanistic research can be other than just mere distribution of knowledge; that it can also challenge the way of thinking as such. The article's concept of enunciation is derived from a Jacques Lacan-inspired psychoanalysis. Analytically the outset is the Danish think tank Center for Wild Analysis, which since 2006 has worked with different ways of undoing the significance of the author.

Pseudonymitet, anonymitet og kollektivitet: Center for Vild Analyses forsøg med uvæsentliggørelse af afsenderidentiteten