Can humanities and sciences really work together?

Richard ParncuttCentre for Systematic Musicology

University of Graz, Austria

SysMus12: International Conference of Students of Systematic Musicology

Montreal, 26 May 2012SysMus Graz

Do we need disciplinary categories?Schwarz oder weiß Text & Musik: Oliver Gies (2009?)

Hörst du Beatles oder die Stones?Guckst Du Tagesschau oder Indiana Jones?Warst du Zivi oder beim Bund?Bist du schüchtern oder drängst dich in den Vordergrund?Bist du träge oder agil?Depressiv oder mental eher stabil?Trinkst du Wein oder lieber Bier?Hast Du’n Reihenhaus m. Garten od. lebst du v. Hartz IV?

Hähnchendöner oder lieber Lamm?Trennst Du Müll oder schmeißt du alles zusamm’n?Fährst du Taxi oder mit dem Bus?Sagst du Super-Dickmann oder sagst du Negerkuss?Guckst du Arte oder Sat1?Nennst du deinen Sohn Jean-Luc oder Karl-Heinz?Gibst du nach oder bist du stur?Liest Du regelmäßig “Bild” oder hast du das Abitur?

Schwarz oder weißJa oder neinGrautöne sind mir viel zu allgemein Bitte kein “Äh”Bitte kein “Jein”In eine meiner Schubladen, da krieg ich dich schon rein

Abbreviations

• ID = interdisciplinary (-ity)• H = humanities• S = sciences

Disciplinary categories are necessary!Experts and specialization are the basis of academic quality

Epistemology•What is knowledge?•Which knowledge exists?•How is knowledge acquired?

Each discipline has its own epistemologies•Ways of thinking•Ways of doing research•Ways of training future scholars•Ways of evaluating quality

ID collaboration is necessary!due to expansion and specialisation in all disciplines

• The research literature is expanding– total amount doubles every 20 years!

• Time/effort to become expert ≈ constant– about 10 years or 10 000 hours (Ericsson)

Consequences:Research is more specialized Disciplines are SUBdividedExperts confined to SUBdisciplinesCollaboration is necessary

ID is temporaryDisciplinary boundaries are fuzzy and fluid

ID research areas, e.g.:• music history and computing• music analysis and cultural studies• musicology and psychology

…become new disciplines/paradigms, e.g.:• computing in musicology• semiotics• music psychology

ID is relatively unusual

1. CommunicationDifferent ways of talking, researching misunderstandings ID costs extra time and energy

2. Academic infrastructuresClear hierarchies are easy to organiseAcademic infrastructures impede ID

3. Quality control within disciplines“Own” discipline seems superior to Others IDrequires academic openness

The rest of this talk…

Humanities and sciences(a) in general(b) in musicology

Bringing H&S together in musicology(a) in general(b) in my research and teaching

Sciences: The study of nature

Natural, social, formal sciencesIn French: Sciences dures/exactes

Basic sciences their applications• Physics e.g. engineering• Chemistry e.g. manufacturing• Biology e.g. medicine

All three also contribute to war, climate change…

Humanities: The study of cultureIn French: Lettres et sciences humaines

Ancient• philosophy• arts• institutionsEnlightenment• history• languages (linguistics)• cultures (anthropology, ethnology)

Modern • diversity, power relations

Mostly benign - but can also be evil!

Humanities scholars are not “humanists”

Humanism• secular• religious• Christian• etc.

Humanist• morally enlightened person

Scholar• (humanities) researcher

“The two cultures”The separation of H & S(Charles Percy Snow, 1959)

Symptoms• different knowledge, skills, thinking• no common culture, feeling of belonging• intercultural conflict and hostility – a “cold war”?

– H regard S as positivist and naïve– S see H as romantic and impractical

Consequences• intellectual specialisation narrow mindedness• decline of research breadth/quality decline of education• Less feeling of responsibility neglect of world problems?

Separation of H & S

Relationships between disciplines in Austrian research projects funded by FWF1992-2006

FAS.research (2008). Netzwerke der Wissensproduktion. Wien.

Who is your Epistemological Other?Definitions• Are you H or S?Is your training and publications mainly in H or S?

• Who is your Epistemological Other “EO”?Which academic across the H-S divide is interested in your research?

Questions• Think of specific EO colleague back home.• How often do you work with EO?• How important are EO’s ideas to you ?• How might your work benefit from EO?• Would you like to have lunch with EO?

H&S: 18th-century inventions

Sciences (Naturwissenschaften)– Product of “scientific revolution”

• 16th-18th C.; Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Descartes, Newton…

– Term “scientist” was invented c. 1831= member of British Association for the Advancement of S

Humanities (Geisteswissenschaften)– Product of “age of enlightenment”

• 17th-18th C.; Spinoza, Voltaire, Rousseau…

– Reinforced by (German) romantic movement (18th-19th)– Became a reaction against scientific positivism

Four national academic culturesDominant Western academic cultures, 18th-20th Centuries

Country Identity Features/stereotypes (still with us today!)

France strong • Rationalist philosophy• Hierarchic bureaucratic structures

Britain strong • Empiricist philosophy• Practical, straightforward, “objective”• Laissez-faire capitalism

Germany medium • Naturphilosophie = holistic approach to S• Historical orientation • Humboldt-inspired Bildung

USA weak • Inspired by Germany – and reacting against it• Massive investment in S since Pearl Harbourfirst “big S” (Manhattan project)• Professionalization of academic societies scientism, peer review

R. E. Lee & I. Wallerstein (Eds., 2004). Overcoming the two cultures. Science versus the humanities in the modern world-system. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.

Differences between H&Stendencies and extremes

Kind of difference Humanities (H) Sciences (S)

1. Relationship between researcher and object

close (subjective) distant (objective)

2. Size of thesis domain small (specific) large (general)

3. Kind of discourse narrative (qualitative)

numerical (quantitative)

4. Concept of truth depends on context(relativist)

independent of context (positivist)

Points 2, 3, 4 follow from 1 1 is the main difference!But 1 is also taboo (general public thinks subjective=bad)

Lack of open discussion of these differences

1. Aspects of sub- and ob-jectivity1. The research object itself (mind vs nature)2. Distance between researcher & research object3. Methods: rules, logic, procedures, “discipline”? 4. Concepts: mechanistic vs organic5. Agreement among researchers vs diversity

Example: modern psychology • subjective wrt 1?• objective wrt 2, 3, 4, 5? ?

researcherresearch object

1 2 3 4 5

2. Size of thesis domainSize of domain within which a thesis is assumed valid

Humanities: small (modest?)Specific issues:• Ethnology: cultures, behaviors• History: events, people, periods

Sciences: large (arrogant?)General issues:• Acoustics: How is sound transmitted?• Psychology: What is emotion? • Empirical sociology: How does society work?• Computing; neuroscience: How is information processed?

3. Concepts of “truth”

S can also be relativist • Relativity, quantum mechanics• Kuhn: paradigm shift; Foucault: coupure épistémologique

H can also be positivist • If questions have no answer, why ask them at all?• If truth is relative to cultural context, what is culture rel. to?

Humanities• Relativist (limited by researcher’s subjectivity?)

Sciences• Positivist (enabled by researcher’s objectivity?)

H&S: Claims for superiorityS have completely changed our lives!

Enormous impact of technological innovations on everyday life:– communications, transport, media, household appliances…– weapons, pollution, overpopulation, less biodiversity, global warming

H address fundamental everyday issues!– Humans without culture would not even be “human”– Identity is a strong force in everyday human affairs:

Social interaction, family, economics, politics, war and peace

Conclusion: Both are right! Implications: Equal treatment of H&S by universities, politicians & funding agenciesEpistemological equality! End structural discrimination against H

(e.g. use the word “science” correctly!) Balance H&S in musicology

AcademiaSciences Humanities

MusicologySciences Humanities

Epistemological tensionsHow did they start? Can we resolve them? benefit from them?

General conclusions about research, truth, knowledge?

Alterity in academia

out-group: humanities• literature• history• art and music

intermediate• social sciences• legal studies• economics

in-group: sciences• physical sciences• life sciences

English “science” ≠ French “science”

The facts:• Latin scientia = (all) knowledge (pre-H-S concept!)• French science = (all) research/teaching (except lettres)• English science = only objective, positivistic research

Evidence for skeptics:Look up any “faculty of science” or “school of science”!• generally includes physics, chemistry, biology…• never includes sciences humaines: philosophy, history,

anthropology, geography, religious studies…

How could academics make this mistake?Epistemologically naïve scientists dominate academia. They think: Even H should use ‘scientific method’!

Translating “science”Like many other words: the best translation depends on context

English “science”• sciences dures/exactes; naturelles, sociales et formelles

La science, les sciences• academia or academe (=the academic world)• research (or research and teaching)• study (implies H, e.g. literary studies)• scholarship (also implies H, but ambiguous bourse d’études)

Scientifique• Noun: academic (e.g. “I am an academic”)• Adjective: academic (e.g. “academic qualification”, “career”)

Académique• academic (e.g. “academic question”, “academic ceremony”)

Maintaining power with ambiguityHow scientists try to control all academia

How historical musicologists try to control all musicology

S= natural,

social, formal

H= lettres et

sciences hum. science = all academic research and scholarship

Which “science” are you talking

about?

musicology

ethnomusicology

systematic musicology

musicology systematic musicology

musicology = all research about all music

What do you mean by

“musicology”?

green = yes please!red = no thanks!

Implications for researchersCombine & balance approaches of H & S!

1. Balance subjective and objectiveS: Expose and take responsibility for your own subjectivityH: Partially objectify the object of research

2. Balance specific and generalS: Risk generalisation to facilitate applicationH: Treat specific examples as “ground truth”

3. Balance narrative and numericalS: Incorporate qualitative methodsH: Incorporate quantitative measures

4. Balance relativism and positivismH: What is your main thesis? Evidence for and against?S: Consider context (historical, social, cultural, political…)

H-S-IDExtreme examples

Sciences: Chemistry •Why is the research question important?•What are the implications of the findings?•In both cases consider history, society, culture, politics…•Refer to literature in both H&S(All this in addition to the usual scientific rigour)

Humanities: Art history•Clear structure: Introduction, main part, conclusions•Clear statement of question and thesis•Clear statement of evidence for and against thesis•Refer to literature in both H&S(All this in addition to the usual detailed content)

H&S in musicology

• H&S in definitions of music• Epistemologies of H&S in musicology• Alterity in musicology• Why promote H-S-ID?

Any attempt to define music, e.g.: • an acoustic signal that• evokes recognizable patterns of sound,• implies physical movement, • is meaningful,• is intentional wrt (b), (c) or (d), • is accepted by a cultural group and• is not lexical (i.e. is not “language”)

…implies that musicology must mix H&S

Epistemologies of H-musicology

Historical musicol. Ethnomusicology

“music” score part of culture

research topics

composers, works– dead, lost– formal unity of works– musical autonomy– idiosyncracies

history; development

performances– threatened, disappearing– cultural uniqueness– social function– typicalitiestradition; change

target readers “musicologists” ID

authority scholar informants

inspired by: Jonathan Stock, Current Musicology, 1998

Epistemologies of scientific musicology

physics physiology psychology computing

“Music” instruments, rooms, air

bodies, brains

experience, behavior

instructions, codes, samples

Topics (examples) modeling processes emotion analysis

out-group (Others)• acoustics• psychology• physiology • computing

intermediate• ethnomusicology• pop/jazz research• sociology• philosophy• performance research

in-group (“musicology”)• history (Western, elitist)• theory/analysis• cultural studies

Alterity in musicology

Musicological alterity: A benign exampleNicholas Cook (1998). Music: A very short introduction

Exposes musicological prejudice against: • popular and non-western musics (musical Others)• women and non-westerners (human Others)

Low awareness of own prejudice against:• S-musicology (other Others?)• non-Angloamerican musicology

Why promote H-S-ID in musicology?

• Relative size of musicological subdisciplines

• Sources of evidence in musicology

Why promote H-S ID in musicology?Size of musicological subdisciplines

H ≈ S?– amount of research– number of students– social relevance

Ethnomusicology ≈ Historical ≈ Systematic– IMS (“musicology”): 900 participants, mainly historical– ICMPC (music psychology): 400 – only part of SysMus– many ethnomusicological societies and confs

Combining sources of evidence in musicology

(Sub-) Disciplines Sources of evidencePhilosophy Logical argument

Humanities, cultural studies Personal experience and (inter-) subjectivity

Ethnomusicology, sociology InformantsHistory Historical documentsMusic theory and analysis Score analysisPsychology, sociology, acoustics, physiology

Empirical data

Information sciences Computational simulation

My attempts to promote H-S-ID in musicology

Research• Specific projects• New infrastructures

Teaching• Undergraduate• Graduate

My relevant research projectsPsychology, acoustics, computing (S) of music theory (H) Perception of musical structure: pitch, consonance, harmony, tonality, rhythm, meter (with Annemarie Seither-Preisler)

Psychology, acoustics, computing (S) of music expression (P)Computer modelling of expressive performance based on structural analysis of the score (with Erica Bisesi)

Empirical sociology (S) of musical identity (H, P)Music and the social identity of migrants in modern cities (with Martin Winter)

Two tripartite divisions of musicology1. anthropological, historical, systematic2. H = humanities, S = sciences, P = practice

CIM promotes ID collaborationEach abstract has two authors representing H&S

CIM focuses on quality rather than quantity• anonymous peer review of abstracts by H&S

CIM promotes musicology's unity in diversity• all ID music research• all musically relevant disciplines

Past CIMsYear Theme City Host Director

2004 - Graz University of Graz Parncutt

2005 timbre MontréalObservatoire

international de la création musicale

Traube

2007 singing TallinnEstonian Academy of

Music and Theatre Ross

2008 structureThessa-

lonikiAristotle University of

ThessalonikiCambou-ropoulos

2009 instruments FranceUniversité Pierre et Marie

Curie Castellengo

2010nature / culture Sheffield University of Sheffield Dibben

2011 performance GlasgowCentre for Music and

Technology Hair

Future CIMs Please participate!

2017 Emotion and expression

Belgrade, Serbia Faculty of Music, University of Arts

2015Consciousnes

s & imagination

Shanghai, ChinaRes Inst for Ritual Music

in China,Shanghai Cons Mus

2014 Technology Berlin, Germany National Institute for Music Research

2012 HistoryGöttingen, Germany

Musikwissenschaftliches Seminar, U Göttingen

All contributors have at least two authors• H + S +…• S + H + …

All submissions independently reviewed by H&S

Issues• Regular• Special (based on CIM)

JIMS

ESF EXPLORATORY WORKSHOP“Cognition of Early Polyphony”

Graz, Austria, 12-14 April 2012

10 H + 10 S participants• Present research that addresses

the workshop theme• Work across the H-S boundary• Consider future project and grant

options

LECTURE SERIES “Introduction to Systematic Musicology”

In 1st semester of Graz Bachelors Program in Musicology

Parent disciplines (subdisciplines) • S: acoustics, neurosciences, psychology, computing• H: theoretical sociology, philosophy/aesthetics

How to work with them• Hidden truths about contrasting epistemologies• MD & ID approaches

GUIDELINE FOR ADVANCED UNDERGRADUATE AND GRADUATE STUDENTS

The structure of an argumentBringing together H&S in (musicology) research (training)

Problems• S ignore context! And H!• H lack standard structures!

Solutions• S: Consider context!

– Historical, social, cultural, political…– Background; implications

• H: Test a thesis!– Clear question; list possible answers– Clear formulation of thesis and evidence

Talk, Monday 3pm, Palmer lab, Psychology, McGillTell me if you want to come

ConclusionsThe cold war between H & S• Still strong both in musicology and generally• Relatively easy to address and reduce• Research benefits from conflict resolution

Criteria for “truth” and “knowledge”• consistent with different sources of information• consistent with diff. researchers (epistemologies)• honest and unbiased• useful

A theory of “truth” should combine H&S! H & S should be balanced and should work together

Political strategiesH: Negotiate from a strong position!• “I am what I am and what I am needs no excuses” (Gloria Gaynor) -

NOT “If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” (Insane Clown Posse)• Awareness raising about positive roles of humanities and the

necessity of subjectivity-objectivity balance in all disciplines• Lectures, workshops, projects on equal h-s collaboration• Conflict resolution within humanities to enable united action• Development of research evaluation procedures in humanities• Role models: trade unions, feminism, black power• Political action (e.g. teaching strike) if ignored or funding is cut

S: Listen and support!• Expose/include subjectivity, specificity, relativity in own research• Explore/apply H-epistemologies• Promote H-initiatives/concerns in S-infrastructures

Announcing: SysMus13InfoMus Lab and Casa Paganini, Genova, Italy

Professorial hosts• Antonio Camurri (engineering, U Genova)• Patricia Conti (Conservatorio N. Paganini Genova)• Raffaele Mellace (music history, U Genova)

Student organising committee • Edoardo Acotto (Torino)• Manuela Marin (Vienna)• Michelle Phillips (Cambridge)• …