New paper sent: Biopolitics, Deleuze, and a new Contemporary view

Finally, today we have sent a new paper to the "Pléyade" journal to its monographic about biopolitics. We present a different conceptualization about biopolitics, based on some Deleuzian concepts (we pointed out about them here). If the paper is accepted, it will be published on summer 2016. Until then, you can read the abstract (english and spanish) here:

Since Michel Foucault started to use the notion of biopolitics in the decade of the seventies, this has acquired a key relevance in Social Sciences and has been applied to the analysis of a big number of phenomena which transform directly our daily life. This paper rethinks the mentioned notion thanks to the proposals of Gilles Deleuze about the work of Michel Foucault. To do this, first, we examine how the former analysed the notion of power offered by the latter.  Next, we revise the work of several authors that have transformed the meaning of biopolitics. Specifically, we comment the proposals of Paul Rabinow and Nikolas Rose, on the one hand, and the ideas of Andrew Donaldson and Lyle Fearnley, on the other. Third, we present our research based on a case study about the discourses and practises on biosecurity currently deployed by the European Union. Through this work we reread the relation infection-surveillance and put forward the idea of “syndromic observation” as a new dispositive to manage life that would be replacing the notion of biopolitics.

Desde que Michel Foucault utilizó la noción de biopolítica en la década de los setenta, su uso se ha extendido por todas las Ciencias Sociales y se ha aplicado al análisis de un amplio rango de fenómenos que impactan directamente en nuestra vida cotidiana. Este artículo reformula la mencionada noción recurriendo a las propuestas que Gilles Deleuze realizó sobre la obra de Michel Foucault. Para ello, en primer lugar se revisa cómo el primer autor analizó la noción de poder ofrecida por el segundo. A continuación, se hace un análisis de los trabajos que recientemente han transformado la noción de biopolítica. Concretamente, se examinan las propuestas de Paul Rabinow y Nikolas Rose, por un lado, y las de Andrew Donaldson y Lyle Fearnley, por otro. En tercer lugar, se presenta un estudio de caso centrado en los discursos y prácticas sobre bioseguridad que está implementando la Unión Europea. A partir de esa investigación se ofrece una reconceptualización del binomio infección-vigilancia y se plantea la noción de “observación sindrómica” como dispositivo reciente sobre la gestión de la vida que ocupa el lugar explicativo que ofrece la idea de biopolítica.

Photo Credit: Jef Safi

Special Christmas Seminary: Biopolitics at University of Almería

Last friday, one of our POBICS members was invited to celebrate a seminary at the University of Almería (South of Spain). This seminary was focused to degree's student, but some senior lecturers assisted too. 

The topic was about biopolitics, and it was focused in the Foucaultian vision. We read the last chapter of "Society Must be Defended" in fact. We prepared some topics or key points in order to begin the seminary, all of them around one question: How can we accept Foucault's premises in their original mean currently? As Rabinow, Rose and other have commented, our society has changed a lot since Foucault was dead, and we have to keep in mind all of these changes (i.e. Chernobyl, the fall of the Berlin' Wall, GMO food, advances in genetics and DNA, bioterrorism, 11-S, anthrax attacks, etc.).

With this points, both students and profesors asked with really interesting ideas about our main purpose. Here some of them:

-Internet as the real revolution in our era.

-Although it could be most easy to think, we must think power as a grid, and not as a focus in hands of a Sovereign.

-We live in a constant state of Emergency, and it has two posible conceptions: a) State of Emergency as a each time more frequent state where we are managed and controlled and b) State of Emergency as a the only place we can scape and live as a nomad without being captured by the State Apparatus (see Deleuze).

-How can we conceive a positive meaning of power (as if power makes us to act and not to punish).

These ideas was the central element in our discussion. We pointed out some ideas about Agamben, especially with the State of Emergency. We also talked about the Rabinow's work when he uses some foucaultian ideas in order to "refresh" it. 

And that's all for now. From POBICS, we wish you a so merry Christhmas!!

Photo Credit: Kamil Porembinski

Next paper: Scabies, Fear and Refugees in Germany

As we posted a month ago, we are about to publish several papers at the beginning of2016. One of them is very interesting due to the topic' relevance: the wave of refugees and the controversy given in the european politics and management. 

Because of it, we thought it can be quite important to analyse some news and events where refugees and bios were linked. In that sense, thanking to Swen (our german member), we could write this paper where this work is explained. In this post we will offer some key ideas in order to discuss and to know your opinion:

In the first place, we offer our basic hypothesis and we suggest the relationship between fear ( and other afections too ), and foreigness. Pandemics and the bios, as you will read, is a key element in this relationship due to the afections produced by "the other unknown".

In a second moment, we present the phenomenon as it is being lived in Germany. We present the " Myths of Hygiene " in fictional imaginaries but also in the West History. This point is important because it shows that fear and hygiene is not a new binomium, but a rooted think in our societies.

After this, we present emotions in the view we need them. Those emotions are related with the hygienics myth. Hygienics is enacted as a dispositiff that promote some very concrete emotions, and this occurs not only with scabies in the current wave of refugees, but also it have ocurred other times like the last ebola outbreak or about bioterrorism.

We don't want to show here the whole paper. We want to finalize with these sentence, gathered in this work:

"…Such as the issue of hygiene e.g. I mean I clean my toilet at home. So why should they not self-organise cleaning their toilets as well?”

Thomas de Maziere, German Minister for Internal Affairs.

Photo Credit: Geralt.

POBICS is in a new Webpage! TECSAL page

From a couple of weeks, POBICS has been integrated in a new web. This new place is a shared-page between CO-DIS and POBICS. CO-DIS is the other research group which aim is to analise STS on the Autonomous University of Barcelona. Their goals is related with health, robotics and childhoold. You can check more about them here.

The URL of this new web is: https://tecsal.wordpress.com/  and there you can check our joint activity as a "big" research group, because POBICS and CO-DIS usually do knowledge exchange, big seminaries, support each other, etc.

This does not means that our normal POBICS web does not exists any more. POBICS will have its webpage as always (http://pobics.wix.com/pobics)

In this web, you can also to put in touch with us and to check our social networks, the results of our co-managed works, our permanent staff, etc.

We think the best you can do is take a look at it directly!

Photo Credit: TECSAL (CO-DIS and POBICS) web.

EASST Congress. Call for abstracts!

As we have posted a couple of weeks ago, next summer will take place in Barcelona the  big congress about STS. POBICS will be convinor in one of the tracks, and we are looking for researchers that want to participate. The track is pleasant to receive all kind of material, so this is not a normal congress. The track' name is: " Biorisk Intelligence otherwise: Scenarios, Visual Knowledge and new Mechanisms of Surveillance". Here the whole info.:

CfP 4S/EASST 2016 Conference in Barcelona 2016

Track Title: Biorisk Intelligence otherwise: Scenarios, Visual Knowledge and new Mechanisms of Surveillance 

The outbreaks of Ebola and Avian Flu have shown that epidemics as socio-material phenomena have undergone crucial changes. Simultaneously the way we gain, use and reinvest knowledge about such epidemics has changed. Within this context especially the transformations of technologies of epidemiology and preventive medicine are mentionable. Furthermore, the typical statistics-based risk analysis has become replaced by different practices and discourses that we can trace in three dimensions: 

a) First, the relation between knowledge production and fictional scenarios has become redefined. Risk analysis appears rather as a product than as a starting point for the development of knowledge and strategies with respect to epidemics.

b) Second, there is massive production of images that relate different actors on different levels and link different scales of epidemics. 

c) Third, new technologies such as smartphone apps or computer software facilitate the registering of cases of contagion in real-time and allow to track in a visual format the different fluxes of illnesses. 

Interrelated, new practices of biosurveillance, for instance, syndromic surveillance, have become fashionable in the biomedical world. Such new forms of surveillance do not only allow to register symptoms of a disease or to track the movement of sick population or individuals; instead, it is now possible to collect information about signals of anormality that are assembled in big syndromes and not in real diseases. 

These changes might point at a deeper transformation of power and the rise of a new intelligence related with a new form of governing society through biorisk and future threats that needs to be discussed. 

We invite people (scholars, writers, artists, designers, programmers, developers, etc.) from all kinds of disciplines and disciplinary backgrounds to apply for the presentation of their relevant papers, videos, animations, posters, artworks in which they discuss, critically question or engage with this epistemic field that has been opened up by these latest transformations, if possible by taking into account an STS perspective

Looking forward to your proposals. Contact and abstracts to. portraitsbioscontemporary@gmail.com

More info at the official Congress webpage: http://www.sts2016bcn.org/

Photo Credit: darwin Bell

Michel Serres report: The Natural Contract & Atlas

Today we have made our weekly meeting, in this case in order to discuss about two of the most interesting books in the Michel Serres life: The Natural Contract and Atlas. Here the report about the two ones:

THE NATURAL CONTRACT:

Serres: the Mediation' philosopher.

Now that we (humanity) can destroy the world, we have reached a level of the same size as the Earth, then we can look at it face to face (the Anthropocene), and so, we can create a violence with (and no more within) him, so we must create a contract with him.

The Object-world: we have created objects with the size of the world (or even larger), for example, objects like plastic can outlast the lifetime of the world. This would be the maximum violence to the world, and so we should make the peace with him.

Informational Contract should create an informational world, creating peace with the information. This could be a next step after the Natural Contract.

There is a epistemodicea: a work about the relationship between science and law; reason and judgment.

The war pacts struggles in order not to all of us die, one per one till the end. The war is therefore a solution, but what kills us indiscriminate are violence (that is, violence without contract, mere violence). Then, the natural contract, is peace with the world.

Three standard contracts: War, Fortuna and Jupiter.

Hermes (The God of relations) is announcing to us the world as a whole, and he will be replaced by his son, Pan (The God of globalization), the world as a whole. Humanity as a whole, it is the tectonic form that can destroy the world, and it is handled in the information.

We have lost the long term, we have lost the myth, and then we live in the ritual: bureaucracy, administration and pure short term.

The science and law are born at the same time, and born of the limit. This born is placed in Egypt whith the Nile floods that erased the barriers crops. Then, the harpedonaptas used to come ( because they were the experts in law and mathematics) and they restored the crops.

The origin of the word contract is the string. A contract is a way to create strings that bind you with somewhat or something.

ATLAS:

The inclusive / excluded third. This concept was taken later by STS and Agamben (Ban). The "Ors-là" is a shadow that chases the protagonist, where the only way to kill him is to killing oneself. The parasite as a para-site, is next to you. The parasite is the event, that what you do not expect. Who am I? I'm The third. The third included. What is the meaning of this word? I am associated intimately to another and many more. Yes, I am legion: an innumerable set of others. (page 78)

Our construction of the History is a permanent attempt to kill the parasites (in the classical and linear history).

"The "Ors-là" is the third element, the para-site that is always in the relation. And it's not dialectic, but the third exclusided-inclusive".

The Joker, is very important to Serres, it can take on any value (the joker's blanket).

Kineteca: tank movement. Networks are kinetecas for Serres.

Extitution is also a concept appeared in Serres.

Serres, when he is asked about what we can do with an Atlas: "Simulation (or scenarios) links together reason and existence. Simulation says how algorithms and methods are connected through paths or roads". Here are a connection between rationality and existence.

The force is in the fragile: in the details, as well as in the mall or in the weak.

The fold is the element of form, the atom form, his clinamen. The clinamen is the minimum turn, the minimal turn which is necessary to create an inflection in that stream of atoms that is the reality. The difference is what produces a point of reality.

To the small, or within the big: the fold is the connector (clinamen) that would move us form the place and from the space.

Until the fluid has a limit: instead, the wind, has no limits. Have you noticed that our language says that the fragile suppose, because broke, a solid material? How do fluid can not break and lasts longer and better than the rigid? (page 187)

Homothetic, is that which is homogeneous in its parts. The relationship between the global and the local are not homothetic. Because the relationship has to do with the heterogeneous, you do not know how it will be the path between the global and the local: it is uncertain, it can be or not to be ... so it is precarious.

Serres say that mathematics are born in a virtual circuit, on a string. You can not put an exact date. Serres says that Maths born in Mesopotamia, then they go to Egypt, passing through Greece, and return to Egypt, but you can not locate exactly in a historical coordinates.

Formerly, in its origin, the particular adjective, somewhat alchemical, was equivalent to the viscous substance: it was the opossite to the fluid, The origin of the word expresses the result of growth (cresare) of several elements placed together (cum) and then, to lead into another body. It would seem the product of a chemical reaction! In addition, its true meaning brings him about to the dynamics of the mixtures. This growth resembles a sort of extension (page 103)

Photo Credit: David Stanley

Ontological Turn report: Enacment, Agency and others

Enactment concept: it is difficult to translate into Spanish (our daily-use language). It is frecuently translated to act, but it is not exactly. In the legal field it is to enact, but it is translated as to constitute.

The STS have an inquiry about knowledge (how to know better or if a concrete knowledge  is true or false). It would be epistemology. STS then, turns to ontology: how one thing has become what it is, from an  empirical and descriptive view, as anthropologists work, in a very micro-fields and issues.

In the STS is a profound undermining of the taken for granted, "there is nothing qualitatively special on the scientifical practices who give them a real plus to the truth they offer".

(socio)Constructionism vs STS: the ontological turn in STS is not perspectivist. Constructionism silent on ontology, because there are different constructions; Instead, STS accept that there are multiple, changing and poor realities, but STS says that objects are created in practices, and these practices are worth reality, they are real. In the STS, the context idea is rejected: there is only the context in action: according as we speak, we create our context, and may be even materials around the object we're talking may not be part of our context and probably things that are very distant would be part of this temporal-and-poor context. Thus, there are practices and no contexts: as we speak, we connect with other elements, and in this way, we are going opening and contracting the network.

When can we consider that the actor-network has reality or is "closed" our particular actant? by the "Cutting the network" concept. When the process we're working is over due to their idiosyncrasical features. It can be anytime, unexpectedly and it can remain precarious.

Ontology, which is apparently a theoretical and a dense concept, STS make it an empirical concept.

Agency, translation and enactment are three different concepts.

Photo Credit: France Bleu

This week: First birthday POBICS!

Along this week, POBICS celebrate his first year of life! For this reason, we want to share with you some of our best materials: photos, papers, posts, etc. 

In this vein, we want to thank you for stay here weekly and for to read, discuss and share your ideas with us; as well as for wide the POBICS community. It's a big pleasure for us to watch how all of us (and you) have grown. 

Thus, here the most important keys about this first POBICS year:

• The Deleuzian seminary about Foucault (edited in three books), was one of the most important events we held last year, it was so important that we have use it in our current work in several times. Here the reports knowledge1, knowledge 2, power 1, power 2, power 3, and subjectivity.
• We also commented several ideas we were working on: Early Warning System, Speed, body or citizenship, for instance.
• We were in congress, like the 1st International AIBR Anthropology Congress, the II Critical Social Psychology Congress, or next year, the EASST Congress.
• We took a lot of photos:

• Finally, we applied for some grants and project. The groupal one was successful and we achieved a three years funded project, named "Citizen Participation in Social Aproppiation of Knowledge and Technological Design Processes". Unfortunately, one of our members could not achieve a personal grant (FPU) :(

And that's all. Once more time, we want to thank you your support and your participation in POBICS. We want to keep on track with you!

POBICS on the web: current works

In our current post, we want to show some of our working papers we are ending or reviewing. All of them are uploaded on our webpage (http://pobics.wix.com/pobics) so you can consult and watch them whenever you want. Thus, we can give you our current (and unpublished & fresh) ideas:

1) From Biopower to Kinepower in the European Union Biosecurity's Dispositifs

2) What is Biosecurity? The Biotic and the Regimes of Vitality

3) Fear of and Anger against the Other - the Strange, the Sick, and the imaginary Struggle for Survival.

4) From control to biomonitoring: life as its own sentinel

5) Scenarios as states of emergency:a new intelligence for the contemporary epidemiology

As we have said, there are also in our web and in academia.edu, so if you want to discuss them or comment it, feel free to do it here or in our webpage!

Photo Credit: POBICS web

Bruno Latour seminary: New concepts and thoughts

Previous considerations:

1) The actor-network is only one mode of existence among many others.

2) Diplomacy: The way to do that we need now is the diplomat. Drawing on the etymology of diplomacy (bridge builder, you have to negotiate, everything has the same value, we must articulate intelligibility conditions ...). Upon entering the Anthropocene era, you have to link it with Gaia. The agency would be a mediator between the Anthropocene and Gaia.

Tanner 1:

The Agency is not a will or an internal capacity: it is a record of actions. My agency is the record of what I do, the path of what I do; from effects to causes, and not vice versa. To define an agency we make a list, a network.

At the moment that an object is shaped (eg quasar.), All these people transformed signals showed on a display into a quasar, "That is a quasar." It is credited with a value of externality by implementing some technologies which we think is external and that it has always been there; this is the metamorphic zone.

Tanner 2:

Anthropocene: the moment which the human is a tectonic or geological force that can fight face to face lwith nature, at the same level (as planetary boundaries); is a new stage for the social sciences.

Here, we could be confusing Gaia with God, with some global or abstract. But nothing further, Gaia is a reading of Gabriel Tarde applied to nature.

Debate 2-2:

Why capitalism has survived so long despite the criticism it has always been subjected? One answer has to do with the ANT vision:  as a global being, capitalism is a mot d'ordre (empty of meaning). The strength of capitalism is his way to extract value or goodwill from many places and different ways, adapting to all in their micro-level. Thus, capitalism lands in a thousand different ways, and those details is what gives strength to capitalism.

The market is previous to capitalism (the trade is much earlier), but the first one is trapped by capitalism in a very specific way.

Capitalism: a "peaceful" method of generating wealth, moving wealth (goodwill). A capitalist doesn't purchase 20 yachts (in the Middle Ages, wealth was achieved by accumulation). The capitalist is the one who moves wealth to generate more wealth.

The global does not exist, it is articulated by operators (Internet, ozone ...). Capitalism is another operator that articulates the global on the Anthropocene time.

Institution in ANT: The actor-network create many mechanisms to stop to being a precarious actor-network, and thus survive; to be more solidified (the actor-network is always precarious, fragile, unstable). The actor-network is always in a process that allows it to survive. Thus, capitalism has created this sense of original nature (the first nature in Latour). It is a very very armored institution. Ontologically, macro or a large object is merely the sum or combination of micro elements (in the Gabriel Tarde's sense).

Harlequin coat: The Harlequin layer is made of pieces, but overall you see it as a whole, but it is composed of pieces.

Metrology: how big or long are the rails that are put into circulation by the knowledge that a scientific of technological group create (throughout translation processes). The more associated and bigger is your metrology, the freer and more power you are; and also more able you are to disconnect from all networks, linkages and partnerships.

Body in ANT: an interface, my body is a mediator as well. The body is not a beginning neither an end, it's a bridge, it is a intermediate step crossed by a lot of elements. You can be the beginning and the end at the same time in a particular mediation-process.

Photo Credit: Geralt

Macro Congress at Barcelona about STS!!

As we posted two post ago, next summer the major congress about Science and Technology Studies will be hold in Barcelona (Spain). The title in this ocassion is "Science and Technology by Other Means". For sure, from POBICS we will do our best in order to try to participate in this great event. 

Currently, submision for tracks is open. A track is more than just a communication: is the whole line where all kind of works will be received (Symposium, working papers, communications, documentals, images, etc). The website is just here: http://bit.ly/1NaISRS and information about tracks can be consulted here: http://bit.ly/1MvMFKZ.

In our webpage we will be posting more information as the date approaches. Meanwhile, you can check the basic in our "events" section (http://bit.ly/1DR6pj2).

The congress we will be operated in English preferably, so that anyone can access and participate (other languages can be utilised informally). Here the Congress' motto:

Science & technology by other means: Exploring collectives, spaces and futures.

"Some decades ago several STS scholars defended that science and technology could be considered as ‘politics by other means’. Many years have gone through, and STS researchers are increasingly turning their attention towards proposals and experiences where science and technology are increasingly performed ‘by other means’: in a variety of exploratory activities that include the articulation of collectives that do not fit with the traditional actors in science and technology, or in ways that problematize the established value systems involved in the production of knowledge and technologies –e.g. fostering the creation of open science, DIY design and commons-based p2p projects, citizen science and maker communities, feminist and environmentalist technoscience projects, and many other platforms seeking to create alternatives to public/private technoscientific arrangements-.

Emerging science and technology practices show how public and private actors are being re-assembled along routes that do not follow once established divides: science and technology are increasingly produced by private not-for-profit actors, such as CSOs, patient organizations and new citizens’ collectives, whilst traditional public institutions once entrusted with the mission of ‘producing’ science and technology for the common good, like universities and research centers, are being transformed into for-profit organizations subjected to productivity bonus, austerity measures and new public management accounting principles. These emerging and consolidating phenomena destabilise and re-signify existing public and private spaces, whilst generating new ones. In turn, new technoscientific communities and unexpected political mobilizations are ongoingly opening up, incessantly engendering other contested options, as well as forging routes to explore more democratic and hospitable futures in the times of care, housing, food, financial and environmental crisis.

The joint 2016 4S/EASST conference in Barcelona will be an opportunity to share reflections, ideas, findings and projects on a variety of aspects characterizing these alternative ways to do science and technology: (a) such as the fact that, for instance, all of these transformations usually take place in blurred everyday spaces and not in those enclosed established spaces for science and technology development, such as laboratories or industrial R&D departments; (b) or, in a similar way, the fact that research and innovation processes are increasingly organised in networked, horizontal assemblages where the traditional hierarchies in science are put into question and where science and technology are being co-produced by different actors in different, sometimes antagonistic, ways; (c) and, finally, the fact that traditional boundaries between the public and the private are no longer confined to state and for-profit actors, care practices taking a preeminent presence in most of these everyday situations."

Photo Credit: Jan Jernmark

Geoffroy de Lagasnerie summary: "Last Lesson Given by Foucault"

We are coming back and now we want to offer a little and brief summary about how was our meeting in order to discuss about the work about Foucault writen by this author. 

We discussed particularly about some key points:

-Differences between Liberalism - Neoliberalism

-Are we still in a "Homo Oeconomicus" rationalism?

-Was then, Foucault, a Neoliberal?

Foucault will say that there is a fundamental difference between liberalism and neoliberalism that Lagasnerie did not collect: labour. In Marxism theories, labour is a work force that you sell and other pays to you. Nonetheless, in Neoliberalism labour is not a work force: it is a truth with which the subject can understood itself.

Main differences Liberalism-Neoliberalism:

Laissez-faire, do not intervene.	Must intervene under the ground.
The homo economicus is a partner with whom you exchange.	Homo Oeconomicus is not a partner, is a businessman himself, he is his own capital, his own business.
Disciplinary Societies.	Control Societies.
Still believe in the totality and universality.	Charge against any principle of totality, backing the plurality.
It is still not as stressed the role of the experts (When the king is removed, we must to be governed by rules).	The role of experts is much more main in all fields.
Economics is a science of prices and resources.	Economics isa science of  rational decisions.

Economics is the space that offers a better veridiction ground. Neoliberalism is adjusted to control societies, it is the place par excellence of government, the structure is always in economic terms. This may not fit with the idea of Deleuze, because he does not see a predominance of one type of place. 

What would today replaced the entrerprise-form, the entrepreneur of itself? Is there a new diagram where the pre-eminence would not be economic, but biological, for instance? How would it be? 

Photo Credit: Karl-Ludwig Poggemann

New seminary: Geoffroy de Lagasnerie "The Last Lesson Given by Foucault"

As we are announcing along this week, next friday we will hold our first "big seminary" to the 2015-2016 course, and in this opportunity we have chosen this book in order to "close" the Foucault cycle started last year with the Deleuze course about Foucault.

This year, we want to read and to discuss about two main lines after read this book: classics authors from Social Studies of Science and Technology (Latour, Stengers, Woolgar...), and a review about the Michel Serres' work (Le Contrat Naturel, Atlas, Variations sur le Corps).

Having said this, Lagasnerie book is an important chance to understand some other interpretations about Foucault work (different to the deleuzian view, for instance), and also is a good opportunity to link it to current events and ideas we are working. 

In this vein, we think we can learn so much (regardless of whether we agree or not with Lagasnerie) about liberalism using the terms and vocabulary given by Foucault. Undoubtely, it would be an interesting option to add some question to our paper about State of Exception and Capitalism, but to future papers we can discuss it with our current vision and enrich the last one with new ideas. 

Next weekend we will publish the report about this seminary. As always, you are invited and you can tell it to anyone interested in our topics. Meeting we will in the Martín Baro's room, at Social Psychology Department on the Autonomous University of Barcelona (10-23, at 11:00 am). 

Next post we will be about the next EASST Conference which will take place at Barcelona in August-September 2016. POBICS we will participate as organizator and also as a "track" about biorisk and biosurveillance. 

Please,  share this and we would be very happy!

Photo Credit: Thierry Ehrmann 

A little piece of our work & ideas: Current inquiries by Marco Maureira

Today's post will be one video that Marco sent this week from Basque Country (where he is living currently) talking about our ideas and our work. Thus, we want to show how we work, what are our research inquiries, and definitely, a little piece of "our within". We hope you enjoy it:

That's all for now. We will very happy if you share our blog or comment with your buddies what are we doing. Check also our webpage: http://pobics.wix.com/pobics

Video Credit: Marco Maureira, member of our research staff.

Francisco Tirado's Seminary at CEHIC - UAB: POBICS, Pandemics, Scenarios, Early Warning-Systems and Images. Part II

After publicate the first part of our POBICS presentation at CEHIC-UAB, here we leave the second part about it. We have delayed in the publication due to the big data amount to updload, so we apologize for any inconvenience:

(Do not forget to turn up the volume)

Third part:

Forth part:

If you like our presentation, share it and leave a comment in order to know you and to discuss our works, you are welcome!

On the other hand, we want to invite you to our next seminary, this Tuesday 10-13 at 12:00 in the Ana Garay's room (Social Psychology Department, UAB), to discuss about Walter Benjamin.

Video Credit: POBICS Staff.