Blockchain Papers

Marta Dynel

This paper contributes to the nascent research on Internet memes examined as items of (de)legitimising discourse, its empirical focus being memes addressing NFTs (non-fungible tokens). The mystifying NFT trade became hype in 2021, attracting massive media coverage and stimulating heated discussion across social media, which includes memetic content production. This study explores the multimodal discourses of (de)legitimisation in NFT memes. Based on a dataset of relevant 993 memes extracted manually from an automatically generated corpus of 1628 Twitter memes, a deductive-inductive multimodal analysis proves the original dichotomy (underlying the polarised views expressed through memes) insufficient. Seven memetic patterns dictated by (de)legitimisation stances are identified. In addition to NFT-legitimising and NFT-delegitimising categories, ambiguous equipotential (de)legitimisation memes, two categories of memes with blended (de)legitimising stances and two categories of elusive-stance memes are distinguished. The notion of ‘quasi-legitimisation’ is proposed to capture the memetic categories that normalise the thorny concept of NFTs.

Tomasz Żukowski

The motif of Righteousness acts as a vaccine (in the sense of Roland Barthes). Its function is to preemptively dismiss the allegation of continuity between prewar and wartime antisemitism in Poland (in fact, ethnic cleansing plans formulated before the war were implemented during and after the war). The theme turns out to be very persistent in postwar Poland in the motif of an antisemite who becomes Righteous. The chapter analyzes the narrative structure of the Righteous-antisemite figure based on the text “Polak-katolik i katolik-Polak” (A Pole Catholic and a Catholic Pole) by recognized Polish intellectual Jan Boski. What is at stake in Boski’s considerations is the release of the Polish community from the accusation of complicity in the Holocaust. Boski proves that Polish antisemitism related to Christianity did not assume extermination forms and stopped wherever violence began. His proof is a text by a prewar diarist, a witness to the 1930s pogroms. Boski’s argument contains glaring logical errors, which create the mechanism of acquittal yet remain invisible to both the author and the Polish culture. The diarist distances himself from violence that takes the form of racial riots. His distance is treated as an objection, and moreover, it is generalized. The isolated attitude becomes proof of the attitude of the entire community. The aggressive crowd about which the memoirist writes disappears and is removed from the image of the nation.

Tanusree Sharma, Yujin Potter, Zachary Kilhoffer, Yun Huang · 6 authors

How AI models should deal with political topics has been discussed, but it remains challenging and requires better governance. This paper examines the governance of large language models through individual and collective deliberation, focusing on politically sensitive videos. We conducted a two-step study: interviews with 10 journalists established a baseline understanding of expert video interpretation; 114 individuals through deliberation using InclusiveAI, a platform that facilitates democratic decision-making through decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) mechanisms. Our findings reveal distinct differences in interpretative priorities: while experts emphasized emotion and narrative, the general public prioritized factual clarity, objectivity, and emotional neutrality. Furthermore, we examined how different governance mechanisms - quadratic vs. weighted voting and equal vs. 20/80 voting power - shape users' decision-making regarding AI behavior. Results indicate that voting methods significantly influence outcomes, with quadratic voting reinforcing perceptions of liberal democracy and political equality. Our study underscores the necessity of selecting appropriate governance mechanisms to better capture user perspectives and suggests decentralized AI governance as a potential way to facilitate broader public engagement in AI development, ensuring that varied perspectives meaningfully inform design decisions.

Christopher W. Tindale

Part of the RSA series in transdisciplinary rhetoric, this volume brings together the insights of a diverse group of rhetorical scholars exploring the rhetorical dimensions of mathematics. There is no single perspective or approach on display as the reader is presented with studies of the rhetoric of mathematics as well as the use of rhetoric in mathematics and the rhetorical nature of mathematical language. These three prongs structure Edward Schiappa's foundational paper that explicitly informs the work of several contributors to the volume. In addition to these essentially theoretical explorations, the volume is rounded out by prescient applications that reinforce the topicality and importance of the subject matter. But any full review of the collection must begin with Schiappa's analyses.To the casual reader, no subjects could be more disconnected than rhetoric and mathematics. The language of demonstration and proofs measures an attitude of mind that values the apodictic and axiomatic while marginalizing, if not ignoring, the efforts of rhetoric. Chaim Perelman drew attention to this divide in his critique of the Cartesian ideal that detached the self-evident from the human sphere, wherein questions arise that mathematicians would consider foreign to their discipline.1 To consider numbers themselves as a source of evidence is part of what is at stake when mathematics is exposed as a human activity. Schiappa takes what Perelman abandoned and claims it as rhetorical territory. “In What Ways Shall We Describe Mathematics as Rhetorical?” answers the question in fertile ways (as subsequent papers show). The rhetorical turn of recent decades involves the rhetorical nature of mathematics on different fronts: “(1) the rhetoric of mathematics, understood as the persuasive argumentative use of mathematics; (2) rhetoric in mathematics, understood as the argumentative modes of persuasion found in written proofs and arguments throughout the history of mathematics; and (3) mathematical language as rhetorical, a sociolinguistic approach to the language of mathematics,” an approach supported by recent writings of Thomas Kuhn (33). In the first case, mathematics serves as evidence in an argument, increasing the persuasiveness of a claim. The second case refers to the argumentative and stylistic modes of persuasion found in proofs, a feature of the history of mathematics. The final case finds its motivation in the work of rhetoricians like Richard Weaver and Kenneth Burke,2 for whom all symbol use is rhetorical including that of mathematics. Mathematics is a language like others and with its own reasoning patterns operating in the discourse community of mathematicians. Schiappa illustrates each of these rhetorical aspects of mathematics with examples and bolsters their importance with argument, including a detailed discussion of the work of Kuhn. This, before taking a particularly interesting turn into ethnomathematics and the differences in how mathematics is conceived and used across cultures.Four of the papers in the collection make explicit reference to Schiappa's account and draw part of their stimulus from his distinctions; and the other analyses can be read through the lens of one or more of his distinctions, whether the papers are historical in nature or deal with contemporary questions. In the opening paper, and beyond their Introduction, the book's editors, James Wynn and G. Mitchell Reyes, open some of the relevant discussions by exploring relationships between rhetoric and mathematics. They reinforce their belief that the volume offers a timely and coordinated effort to explore the intersections of these two fields. In Schiappa's distinctions they find the appropriate routes into the subject matter. They trace the historical division between the fields, beginning with Plato and Aristotle, whose system of argument offered little overlap between rhetoric and mathematics, through to the uneven attention directed by Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca (not so much, although the authors’ reading of quasi-logical arguments suggests something) and Burke (quite a bit, with the explicit inclusion of mathematics as a symbolic means of communication). This reinforces the importance of rhetoric in mathematics, and much of Wynn and Reyes’ closing analyses confirm this.Two papers pursue the themes of the volume into the field of economics. Catherine Chaput and Crystal Broch Colombini explore the persuasive role of mathematics at work in the metaphor of the invisible hand. And G. Mitchell Reyes provides a detailed investigation of the 2008 financial crisis through a case study of the mathematical formula known as the Li Gaussian copula. As Reyes writes: “Unraveling this copula reveals the constitutive rhetorical force of mathematical discourse—its capacity to invent, accelerate, and concentrate economic networks” (83). The story is long and far too complex to be detailed here. But the study rewards the reader with an understanding of just how traditional rhetorical modalities (like analogy and argument) connect to the rhetorical modalities of numeracy (like abstraction and commensurability) to generate something new (114).Likewise, Chaput and Colombini draw from the traditions of rhetoric in exploring the metaphor of the invisible hand. Their concept of particular focus is energeia, the power or force that activates potential. One of the theses of the analysis is that “the metaphor of the invisible hand regulates the energetic force of economic arguments” (62), and they track the metaphor accordingly, from the work of Adam Smith to that of John Maynard Keynes, where mathematics gains a more central place in economic discussion, and on to Milton Friedman's “positivist mathematical economics” (66). Through these and further analyses, the paper successfully supports the argument that capitalism's force (energeia) emerges in part from the historical developments of the mathematization of the invisible hand.The last paper of Part 2, by Andrew C. Jones and Nathan Crick, weaves together the mathematical reasoning of Charles Sanders Peirce and the detective fiction of Edgar Allen Poe, specifically the Dupin trilogy that includes “The Murders in the Rue Morgue.” The discussion identifies similarities between Poe's forensic analyst and Peirce's mathematician, offering a further case of rhetoric in mathematics. Like Burke in the earlier paper, Peirce is a thinker who understands rhetoric as the effective communication of signs—although I would not want to be taken as suggesting similarities between Burke and Peirce beyond this—and this would apply to all signs, including the mathematical. Poe's detective Dupin further illustrates Peirce's method of abduction, and Jones and Crick take us through the steps involved, from hypothesis to confirmation (while also using the wrong turn of the real case behind “The Mystery of Marie Rogêt” to show how abductive reasoning can fail).Part 3, on mathematical argument and rhetorical invention, begins with Joseph Little's adoption of Schiappa's taxonomy for his study of the Saturnian account of atomic spectra, the most technical paper in the collection. That said, the historical case study of Hantaro Nagaoka underlying the discussion is quite accessible. The investigation of atomic spectra begins with a puzzle involving different appearances under different conditions. Little addresses responses to this by looking at rhetoric in Nagaok's mathematics, specifically his use of an analogy between the behaviour of material in Saturn's rings and that of atoms in what is known as the Zeeman effect. Little then analyzes the rhetoric of Nagaoka's mathematics, showing that “a mathematical equation can function indexically, symbolically, and qualitatively in a given case without taking on a computational role (164). Finally, he completes the Schiappian analysis with an account of Nagaoka's mathematical language as rhetorical in the debate that ensued between Nagaoka and the mathematical physicist G.A. Schott.Jeanne Fahnestock's paper, “The New Mathematical Arts of Argument: Naturalists Images and Geometric Diagrams,” completes Part 3. The study takes its place among Fahnestock's meticulously wrought accounts of rhetorical thinking in the history of science.3 She plunges the reader immediately into a discussion of the depiction of scallops in Martin Lister's publications of 1695. Illustrated with original drawings from the account, the rhetorical importance of image reproduction combined with geometrical ways of seeing diagrammatically is shown to underlie arguing in sixteenth century natural philosophy to an extent “that is difficult to appreciate from a twenty-first century perspective that separates the mathematical and the verbal” (174). Fahnestock believes these features underlie arguing because, unlike today, grounding all disciplines (including mathematics) was dialectic in the form of a general art of argumentation. The dialectic in question is Philip Melanchthon's Erotemata dialectics, a work which Fahnestock has just translated into English (Fahnestock 2021). This is a dialectic in which mathematics plays a detailed role, and the paper proceeds to provide a history of this work that blends naturally into a deeper history of the argumentative use of diagrams. Her conclusions point to how, through geometrically controlled images. mathematical ways of viewing the natural world issued in today's “mathematically constructed world” (204).The final two essays comprise Part 4, and both deal with the role of mathematics in education. James Wynn's “Accommodating Young Women” explores some of the gender biases in the way mathematics is taught but more specifically provides a lengthy case study of the rhetorical devices used by TV star and math scholar Danica McKellar to turn middle school girls to the study of mathematics through her book Math Doesn't Suck. This involves an interesting application of epideictic rhetoric to a contemporary subject of concern, and the strategies used are both traditional and innovative. Essentially, McKellar strives to modify the image of mathematics, and Wynn's study of her attempts is both fascinating and instructive.The final paper in the collection, Michael Dreher's “Turning Principles of Action into Practice,” studies the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics’ (NCTM) rhetoric in reforming mathematics education. Two of Schiappa's categories come into play here: rhetoric of mathematics and in mathematics. Built on a historical account of philosophies of mathematics education, and incorporating several pertinent anecdotes, Dreher reveals the successes and failures of the NCTM's persuasive attempts to counter the idea that mathematical ability is inherent in only few and instead promote wide success in students’ mathematical achievement. It is a challenge that continues, and Dreher makes clear the difficulties still to be faced.This is, in sum, an eclectic set of papers gathered around a few common agreements and unified by a deep conviction of the importance of challenging any vestiges of the traditional belief that rhetoric and mathematics occupy different, even competing, spheres. The stand-out paper, testified to by the importance accorded it by many of the other studies in the book, is Schiappa's. One could say that it is worth the price of the book, but that would be unfair to the many other fine pieces of scholarship collected here.The observant reader will also have noted that much of the forgoing discussion refers to rhetoric and mathematics, while the title of the volume speaks of arguing. In fact, the attention to argumentation is pervasive, and this book takes its place among a recent appreciation of the role of mathematics in argumentation,4 while answering the kinds of dismissive critiques we once witnessed from skeptics like Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont,5 who attempted to maintain the rhetoric/mathematics gap by suggesting that those who crossed it (at least from one direction) were unknowledgeable interlopers. It was one of Schiappa's opening insights that “If we replace the word “rhetoric” with “argument” . . . we find considerable recent interest in “mathematical argumentation” as a social and pedagogical practice” (43). And, as I have noted, this is repeatedly corroborated in this highly recommended book.

Ute Smit

Given the increasing popularity amongst mainland European higher educational institutions to offer some of their classes and courses in English, this paper addresses the roles English plays in such classroom discourse. By focussing on one specific English-medium hotel management programme, it is argued that English functions, on the one hand, as language of the learners' future expertise and, on the other, as their only shared medium of communication, i.e., their lingua franca. A detailed analysis of question-initiated exchanges taken from critical phases throughout the programme accompanied over its whole duration illustrates the realities of this multifunctionality of English as revealed in teachers and students raising, and responding to, different kinds of question at different points in time. On the basis of these discourse-pragmatic findings it is suggested that (language) learning processes depend in their complexity and dynamics on English in its roles as lingua franca and as professional language, but also on how these roles are conceptuald within a generally content-focussed teaching programme.1 IntroductionEspecially in the European context, 'Bologna' has become almost synonymous with 'internationalising tertiary educational institutions'. The structurally clearest consequence is most likely the three-level architecture of study programmes into bachelor/master/doctorate, but an arguably equally obvious result is the burgeoning use of English as medium of instruction at universities in mainland Europe, which have had a tradition in lecturing in the respective national language. This popularity of university teaching in English is fuelled by internationalisation on two levels: as regards the exchange of information, i.e. academic knowledge and thought, and of lecturers and students as relevant social agents.Understandably, this recent development of offering study programmes or, at least, individual classes in English, has attracted a considerable amount of applied linguistic research interest (e.g. Wachter and Maiworm, 2008; Wilkinson, 2004; Wilkinson and Zegers, 2007). As regards the micro-level of the classroom language itself, the conceptual frame tends to be the one of English for specific purposes (ESP). Put somewhat crudely, it pictures and describes classroom discourse in relation to language norms established either in works of language codification or by the expert community of the specialisation in question (e.g. Fortanet-Gomez & Raisanen, 2008). This underlying prescriptive orientation seems compatible with the educational setting at stake and its central focus on formal learning. Inspired by the modelling of primary and secondary education in an additional language as 'CLIL' (content and language integrated learning), the learning process is argued to include the respective knowledge content area as well as the additional language used (Coyle, Hood and Marsh, 2010), giving it the label 'integrating content and language in higher education' (ICLHE) (Wilkinson and Zegers, 2007). In other words, English as classroom language is modelled as object of learning itself.While such a conceptualisation has its clear merits - the range and variety of publications and their insights provide ample proof of that - the emphasis placed on ESP arguably sidelines the fact that English has yet another function, and at that a very crucial one. In view of the internationalisation of academia in research and teaching it is used as the multilingual social actors' common medium of communication, which permits direct exchange of information and construction of knowledge across language borders. In other words, English is the lecturers' and students' lingua franca (e.g. Bjorkman, 2009; Smit, 2010a). Recently, research into ELF has been booming, resulting in an impressive array of findings and insights with the underlying endeavour to describe English as it is used in communication, rather than in contrast with what ought to be the case in comparison with norms and expectations, reflecting language learning outcomes. …

Eddo Rigotti, Sara Greco

No abstract is available for this record.