17.391 transcorporate? non sibi sed omnibus?

From: Humanist Discussion Group (by way of Willard McCarty willard.mccarty@kcl.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 10 2003 - 07:18:46 EST

  • Next message: Humanist Discussion Group (by way of Willard McCarty

                   Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 17, No. 391.
           Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
                         Submit to: humanist@princeton.edu

       [1] From: lachance@origin.chass.utoronto.ca (Francois (17)
             Subject: transcorporate

       [2] From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty@kcl.ac.uk> (12)
             Subject: non sibi sed omnibus

             Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 11:33:02 +0000
             From: lachance@origin.chass.utoronto.ca (Francois Lachance)
             Subject: transcorporate


    The recent discussion of insider use of terminological shorthand (and
    some other circumstances) has led me to inquire if any of the folks
    conversant with the relevant grey literature mihgt be able to ascertain
    the emergence of a concept of "transcorporate" governance.

    One of the other cirmcumstances was a conversation with an IBM knowledge
    management consultant that turned to the "extra muros" theme in the
    context of enterprises participating in economic sector or industry fora.
    If large multinational corporations are now described as "transnationals",
    is there some group of thinkers exploring the texture of a
    "transcorporate" entities?

    The other circumstance that leads me to turn my thoughts thuswards is the
    upcoming World Summit on Information Society.

    Is Humanist in some sense "trans-corporate"?

    Francois Lachance, Scholar-at-large

             Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 11:32:06 +0000
             From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty@kcl.ac.uk>
             Subject: non sibi sed omnibus

    I am chasing words expressing a particular insight: that some practices,
    though done in solitude, are done for others. One such expression conjoins
    two others, which I think are originally separate: alis volat propriis, non
    sibi sed omnibus "he flies with his own wings, not for himself but for
    others". Another expression may be originally in English: approximately,
    "art is a practice done alone but for others". Help finding sources for
    these, even if they are proverbial, would be greatly appreciated.


    Dr Willard McCarty | Senior Lecturer | Centre for Computing in the
    Humanities | King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS || +44 (0)20
    7848-2784 fax: -2980 || willard.mccarty@kcl.ac.uk

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Nov 10 2003 - 07:38:18 EST