[Xmca-l] Re: in the eye of the beholder

[Larry Purss]

Miguel,
You wrote,
"It's not just that one's lenses are gendered, racialized, etc., which is
often framed as the issue of "perspective," often couched as something
individual.  Perhaps, as standpoint theorists content, science is/should
be perspectival, meaning the achievement of collectives.

This term *perspectival* is the achievement of collectives *through*
historical movements.

I was reading recently about the confluence of perspectives within
Descartes.  He was profoundly influenced by the small minority of people
who wer beginning to consider the world AS a mechanism LIKE a clock.
He was also deeply embedded in the perspective of his Jesuit education.

BOTH these perspectives [one radical and novel the other *common sense* wer
both implicated in Descartes *meditations*  He was producing a synergy.
The warranted assertability of EACH perspective could be viewed as
contradictory and discontinuous.
However, the particular *way* Descartes *formed* a novel SYNERGISTIC
perspective [*I* think therefore *I* am ] has evolved to *be* a dominant
warranted assertability [in the way the Jesuit perspective was dominant in
Descartes epoch]
THIS way of considering the *perspectival* points to a very complex
development [if seen as continuous.] Another perspective is to see the new
*perspective* as *enveloping* the previous perspective which emphasizes the
*discontinuities* between the two perspectives. I would suggest that BOTH
*perspectives* are *valid* depending on the *way* one orients to the
questions and answers.

Perspectives and perspectival standpoints are multi verses or poly verses.
Not individual but multiple and each perspectival view is implicated [and
inherited] within particular historical developments/envelopments.

Mike recently sent Raymond Williams article on the meaning of *mediation*
I would suggest the term *perspectival* also has a complex historical
development.
Do we need to replace the term *perspective* as implying an interior
subjective view?  or can the term *perspective* include the historical
collective understanding of SHARED perspectives.

Larry

On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Zavala, Miguel <
mizavala@exchange.fullerton.edu> wrote:

> This study can be linked to ideas generated by Science & Technology
> Studies (which I characterize as a meta-reflection on how science is
> situated and culturally mediated).  But it can also be linked to the work
> of Sandra Harding and others on standpoint theory.
>
> It's not just that one's lenses are gendered, racialized, etc., which is
> often framed as the issue of "perspective," often couched as something
> individual.  Perhaps, as standpoint theorists content, science is/should
> be perspectival, meaning the achievement of collectives.
>
> Miguel
>
>
> On 9/21/14 6:40 PM, "mike cole" <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
> >It's the first message that is new. The second has been an unaccepted
> >criticism for at least half a century.
> >Both are right!
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >On Sunday, September 21, 2014, Martin John Packer
> ><mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> So there are two distinct problems here: First, the researchers are not
> >> diverse. Second, the people they (we?) study are not diverse.
> >>
> >> Martin
> >>
> >> On Sep 21, 2014, at 8:11 PM, David Preiss <daviddpreiss@gmail.com
> >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Loved the WEIRD acronym. One of the best ironies I've seen in recent
> >> scientific writing.
> >> >
> >> > Enviado desde mi iPhone
> >> >
> >> >> El 21-09-2014, a las 18:57, Rod Parker-Rees <
> >> R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk <javascript:;>> escribió:
> >> >>
> >> >> Great article, David - highlights the importance (at every level) of
> >> being aware of what others might find odd about us (secondary
> >> socialisation?).
> >> >>
> >> >> Rod
> >> >>
> >> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;> [mailto:
> >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>] On Behalf Of David
> >>Preiss
> >> >> Sent: 21 September 2014 18:31
> >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: in the eye of the beholder
> >> >>
> >> >> This article is revelant for this topic:
> >> http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~henrich/pdfs/WeirdPeople.pdf
> >> >>
> >> >> Enviado desde mi iPhone
> >> >>
> >> >>> El 21-09-2014, a las 13:42, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu
> >><javascript:;>>
> >> escribió:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The book by Medin and Bang, "Who's asking" published by MIT is GREAT
> >> >>> reading. Seeing this in Scientific American is super.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> mike
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 8:18 AM, David Preiss
> >><daviddpreiss@gmail.com
> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> What a fantastic piece Peter! Loved the references to primatology.
> >> >>>> David
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Enviado desde mi iPhone
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> El 21-09-2014, a las 7:31, Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu
> >> <javascript:;>> escribió:
> >> >>>>
> >>http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/point-of-view-affects-how-s
> >> >>>> cience-is-done/
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Development and Evolution are both ... "processes of construction
> >>and
> >> >>> re- construction in which heterogeneous resources are contingently
> >>but
> >> >>> more or less reliably reassembled for each life cycle." [Oyama,
> >> >>> Griffiths, and Gray, 2001]
> >> >>
> >> >> ________________________________
> >> >> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]<
> >> http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass>
> >> >>
> >> >> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely
> >> for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the
> >> intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the
> >> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on
> >>it.
> >> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know
> >> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not
> >> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University
> >>accepts
> >> no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan
> >>emails
> >> and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept
> >>responsibility
> >> for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its
> >> attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless
> >>accompanied
> >> by an official order form.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >--
> >
> >Development and Evolution are both ... "processes of construction and re-
> >construction in which heterogeneous resources are contingently but more or
> >less reliably reassembled for each life cycle." [Oyama, Griffiths, and
> >Gray, 2001]
>
>
>