[Xmca-l] Re: Polysemy of "Community"

[Cliff O'Donnell]

Yes, the embodiment is "not the precondition of man’s formation but  
its product."

Cliff

On Aug 14, 2013, at 6:59 PM, mike cole wrote:

> Colleagues-- Is there perhaps some relationship between the notions of
> "shared artifacts" and "shared meanings?" If Mandelshtam forgot the  
> word he
> wanted to say, and thought,
> unembodied, returned to the hall of shadows" what is the form of the
> embodiment if not in something human-created, a paricular,  
> historically
> sedimented, materialized configuration of the human voice that, dare  
> we
> consider it, ART-i-ficial?
>
> perhaps?
> mike
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>  
> wrote:
>
>> That's an alternative way to go, Cliff, define "community" by "shared
>> meanings," but the upshot of that way is the counter-intuitive  
>> conclusion
>> that kids and their parents belong to different "cultural  
>> communities."
>>
>> There is one point which I must clarify though from your last words  
>> below:
>> "The material form of an artifact may be universal in the sense  
>> that we may
>> all agree on the label for it. However, the artifact may have very
>> different meanings for us." No. The artefacts have a universal  
>> material
>> form despite us having "different labels" for it. The foundation of  
>> natural
>> science is that matter exist independently of human activity,  
>> obedient to
>> natural laws which are knowable. And natural science has a right to  
>> exist;
>> it is not a giant mistake. We *do* of course ascribe different  
>> meanings to
>> one and the same material form or object, but that is thanks to human
>> activity. The matter exists independently of our interpretation of  
>> it. This
>> is why I know I can rely on artefacts to provide a sound, universal
>> foundation for "community," and I leave it entirely open that a
>> multiplicity of meanings and actions are in conflict within the  
>> community.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>> Cliff O'Donnell wrote:
>>
>>> So I can see a problem with making "community" the subject matter,  
>>> or
>>>> "unit of analysis" for a study;
>>>>
>>>
>>>    We agree. That is why activity settings are the units of  
>>> analysis we
>>> use.
>>>
>>> one would have to first select an artefact or combination of  
>>> artefacts,
>>>> (such as language and land) which serves to define the basis of  
>>>> the said
>>>> "community." The point then is that the "community" is *not*  
>>>> defined by
>>>> shared *meanings*;
>>>>
>>>
>>>    So why define community by artifacts? Why not by shared meanings?
>>>
>>> in fact, different components of the "community" may attach
>>>> diametrically opposite meanings to a given artefact (word,  
>>>> symbol, tool,
>>>> ...) or even use it in ways which are quite incommensurable.
>>>>
>>>
>>>    If community is defined by shared meanings, those with  
>>> "diametrically
>>> opposite meanings" would by definition belong to different cultural
>>> communities (even if they did live in the same geographical unit).
>>>
>>> But! the material form of the artefact is *universal* in what ever  
>>> way
>>>> it is used, meant or interpreted. The *materiality* of artefacts  
>>>> is the
>>>> foundation was what is *universal* in human life. Projects give  
>>>> us what is
>>>> *particular* in human life (ascribing different meanings to one  
>>>> and the
>>>> same artefact), and actions (not persons) give us what is  
>>>> *individual* in
>>>> human life, for the purposes of theoretical analysis.
>>>>
>>>
>>>    The material form of an artifact may be universal in the sense  
>>> that
>>> we may all agree on the label for it. However, the artifact may  
>>> have very
>>> different meanings for us and these meanings may lead to quite  
>>> different
>>> actions and, as you point out, be the basis for conflict.
>>>
>>>    Cliff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>>
>>

Clifford R. O'Donnell, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
Past-President, Society for Community Research and Action (APA  
Division 27)

University of Hawai‘i
Department of Psychology
2530 Dole Street
Honolulu, HI 96822