David J. Staley

Futures thinking for academic librarians: Higher education in 2025

For academic librarians seeking to demonstrate the value of their libraries to their parent institutions, it is important to understand not only the current climate. We must also know what will be valued in the future so that we can begin to take appropriate action now. This document presents 26 possible scenarios based on an implications assessment of current trends, which may have an impact on all types of academic and research libraries over the next 15 years. The scenarios represent themes relating to academic culture, demographics, distance education, funding, globalization, infrastructure/facilities, libraries, political climate, publishing industry, societal values, students/learning and technology. They are organized in a “scenario space” visualization tool, reflecting the expert judgment of ACRL members as to their expectations and perceptions about the probability, impact, speed of change and threat/opportunity potential of each scenario. Finally, the study draws out implications for academic libraries. For scenarios which have been identified as high impact with a high probability of occurring, it is incumbent upon library directors and those who set strategic agendas for academic libraries to plan to act now upon these scenarios. This report reinforces the notion that academic libraries are part of a larger ecosystem, and librarians should be consistently scanning the environment to look for signs of the changes that may come. It includes an appendix with a suggested activity to engage library colleagues in stretching your imaginations and considering possible futures. This can build capacity to engage in strategic thinking and planning, supporting librarians in making better decisions now that can address a variety of possible futures.

Time and the Ontology of the Future

Ontology is the philosophical inquiry into what exists, and whether or not the phenomenon under consideration exists. The ontology of the future, then, means an examination of the nature and existence of the future. To inquire into the ontology of the future is not to ask “what is the future?” or “what will happen in the future?” but to, instead, consider the nature of the container that is the future. Is the future a kind of container of events? Is it a space that contains all future happenings? If so, this implies that the future already exists, like a distant land toward which we might travel. Perhaps the future is a container that holds only potential occurrences, and is thus not fully in existence. The future might not exist at all, as there are no preexisting occurrences and, thus, nothing to contain such occurrences. The future is a void, and only comes into existence when we experience it, but there is nothing that preexists. The future might already exist because it is a repetition of events that have previously occurred. The goal of the present article is to situate the problem of the ontology of the future within a wider historical context. It has been a commonplace since the Scientific Revolution to view time as linear and the future as an ontologically existent realm linked to past and present. Our understanding of the ontology of the future has a history, meaning that there have been differing ideas about the nature and existence of the future. Generally speaking, how a society understands the shape of time frequently determines how that society views the reality of the future. There is every reason to expect that our view of the nature and actuality of the future will change alongside changes in our understanding of time.

Writing Visual Histories: An Interview with David J. Staley

The author has held an interview with David Staley, a well-known pioneer in computer visualizations in history.

Does Future Thinking Need a Philosophy

The ancients defined “philosophy” as the love of wisdom, but we moderns are not so ambitious. Over the last two centuries, the empiricism of science has largely replaced the speculations of great philosophers as the prevailing way of looking at the universe. We have grown to love data, experiments, statistics, and studies. Yet, even as we enter the twenty-first century, speculative philosophy, conclusions beyond our limited experiences, still provides us the fundamental structure for understanding life. Even the “hard” sciences continue to address basic questions of philosophy: “How do we know what we know?” and “What can we say about what we know?” Other academic and professional disciplines ask similar questions. In contrast, such philosophical questions are rarely addressed in the intellectual pursuit of the future. Is there a philosophy of the future today as there are philosophies of physics, biology, history, and economics? We think not. Does future thinking need a philosophy? We think so. A strong philosophical foundation for foresight and futuring work would contribute much to our unity as professionals, our coherence, and our credibility. Philosophy and Fragmentation among Futurists The lack of a contemporary philosophy of the future has contributed to fragmenting the global community of futurists, many of whom currently go off in very different philosophical and professional directions. Without a core philosophy and shared set of values, we may even doubt that future thinking is a profession at all — certainly not like the professional identities that university professors, physicians, dentists, and lawyers enjoy. As long as this continues, our status as professionals and the credibility of our work will be gravely challenged. One reason for the absence of a unifying philosophy among futurists is the lack of any common educational background. Worldwide, relatively few universities offer structured courses and formal degrees in future studies. In the United States, for example, among thousands of institutions of higher education, only two universities offer a master’s degree in future studies and none awards the PhD. Few U.S. universities and colleges even offer courses on the future. With little opportunity for formal education in future Does Future Thinking Need a Philosophy?

Teaching the Future of Technology in the History Classroom: A Case Study

This article will describe how historians can teach the future of technology. Historians need not alter their traditional methods of historical inquiry to teach the future, and indeed the history classroom is a natural site for foresight education. Historical inquiry begins with questions, and futuring similarly begins with asking the right questions. The historian seeks out evidence, and futurists as well identify drivers and blockers, considering how these drivers and blockers will interact with each other. In contrast to social scientists, historians work with imperfect or incomplete information, an apt description of the state of our evidence about the future. In a manner similar to historians, futurists interpret and draw inferences from evidence. After the research an analysis of the evidence is complete, the historian/futurist writes representations. This article will describe how I employed the historical method to teach the future of technology in a history research seminar, the results produced by the students, and ways that the study of the future can be situated in the history classroom.

Sobre lo visual en Historia .

espanolEste articulo aborda los aportes de la representacion visual para la disciplina historica. Especificamente se refiere a la riqueza cognitiva que trae consigo el uso de nuevas interpretaciones historicas en la Epoca de la Informacion. Este uso de la representacion visual debe ser entendido como un complemento a la palabra escrita y una expansion del ambito tradicionalmente entendido de la historia escrita. portuguesEste texto aborda os aportes da representacao visual para a disciplina historica. Especificamente refere-se a riqueza cognitiva que traz consigo o uso de novas interpretacoes historicas na Epoca da Informacao. Este uso da representacao visual deve ser compreendido como um complemento a palavra escrita e uma expansao do âmbito tradicionalmente entendido da historia escrita. EnglishThis article considers the contribution of visual representations to the discipline of History. It refers specifically to the cognitive richness inherent to the use of new historical interpretations to approach the Information Era. The use of visual representations must be understood as complementary to the written word and as an expansion of the traditional sphere of written history.