[Xmca-l] Re: G. H. Mead and Harvey Sacks

Tue Jul 14 09:34:35 PDT 2015

I'll attach it and fix the site later. Thx for alerting me to the problem. p

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-l-bounces+smago=uga.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces+smago=uga.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 12:05 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: G. H. Mead and Harvey Sacks

Peter,
Love the word play(!), but couldn't access the paper.
 (it says the site is under construction).
Could you send it directly to me?
Or let us know when the site is fixed?
Thanks,
greg

On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 4:27 AM, Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu> wrote:

> By coincidence, someone just sent me a link to 
> https://vimeo.com/57250619 which is a talk by Nikolai Veresov, with 
> whom I'd been unfamiliar. He emphasizes LSV's integration of his love 
> for theater and his insistence on the drama of everyday life as a principal tension in human development.
>
> In case you're interested, I also make these points in:
>
> Smagorinsky, P. (2011). Vygotsky's stage theory: The psychology of art 
> and the actor under the direction of perezhivanie. Mind, Culture, and 
> Activity, 18, 319-341. Available at 
> http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/MCA/MCA2011.pdf
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-l-bounces+smago=uga.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:
> xmca-l-bounces+smago=uga.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of HENRY 
> xmca-l-bounces+SHONERD
> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 9:38 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: G. H. Mead and Harvey Sacks
>
> Thanks for the Kenneth Burke connection, Mike. Fascinating. Vygotsky, 
> if I am not mistaken, uses the metaphor of being “on stage” in human 
> interaction? Langacker uses precisely the same term in his latest 
> work, which attempts to apply cognitive grammar to the actual use of 
> language in real time. This is late in coming from cognitive 
> linguistics, but seems to tap into a something rich with potential, 
> not just for how we use language, but how we learn it and how language 
> changes over time. The point you make about the technologies we have to analyze language use is a good one.
> Henry
>
> > On Jul 13, 2015, at 6:29 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Harvey Sach's was also famous for his "seeming obscurity", Henry.
> > Its difficult to describe a dynamic tangle in linear language.
> >
> > In thinking about the levels of analysis said to differentiate Mead 
> > and Sachs (the first more macro, the other more micro) it is 
> > probably worthwhile to keep in mind the different technologies for 
> > representing the phenomena when communicating with others about them.
> > Harvey work the top end of digital recording as it existed when he 
> > was working, and ethnomethodologists depend hugely on their work for 
> > being able to make the fleeting repeatable. Mead did not have 
> > talking movies and if he had a tape recorder, it was an early model.
> >
> > The link to symbolic interactionism is one that it seems all 
> > chat-minded folks might keep in mind. It brings us around to Kenneth 
> > Burke and dramatism, a topic of direct interest to several on the 
> > list, but rarely discussed.
> >
> > Mead, it seems interesting to note, got his PhD in Germany with 
> > Dilthey (as I recall), the alter-ego of Vygotsky's vision of an
> explanatory psychology.
> >
> > Hmmm, what is there some sort of family resemblance here?
> >
> > mike
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 4:24 PM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I followed Ellen’s suggestion, went to the Mead Project, found 
> >> Prefactory Remarks to Mead’s “The Philosophy of the Present” and 
> >> found
> this:
> >>
> >> "As I look back I can see that a great deal of the seeming 
> >> obscurity of Mr. Mead's expression was due to the fact that he saw 
> >> something as a problem which had not presented itself at all to the other minds.
> >> There was no common language because there was no common object of 
> >> reference. His problem did not fall into the categories and 
> >> classifications of either idealism or realism. He was talking about 
> >> something which the rest of us did not see.”
> >>
> >> Compare that to the “saying” that always appears at the end of Mike 
> >> Cole’s
> >> posts:
> >>
> >> All there is to thinking is seeing something noticeable which makes 
> >> you see something you weren't noticing which makes you see 
> >> something that isn't even visible. N. McLean, "A River Runs Through it”
> >>
> >> Interesting.
> >>
> >> Henry
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jul 13, 2015, at 1:32 PM, Ellen Scully-Russ <scullyru@gwu.edu>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Michael - others
> >>>
> >>> This is a great site for all things Mead --- 
> >>> http://www.brocku.ca/MeadProject/
> >>>
> >>> If you go to the project inventory and then to the M's, you will 
> >>> find an extensive list of Mead's publications with links to the text.
> >>>
> >>> Enjoy....
> >>>
> >>> Ellen
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Glassman, Michael 
> >>> <glassman.13@osu.edu
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Taking a first look at the article there is something that, I am 
> >>>> really confused about, maybe others can help clear up this mystery.
> >>>> Almost all the work cited in the article comes from the book 
> >>>> Mind, Self and
> >> Society -
> >>>> which was published posthumously by his students.  I was also 
> >>>> told in graduate school Mead didn't publish very much on its own.  
> >>>> Yet a few
> >> years
> >>>> ago I went to a Mead archive (it is no longer open, I wish I 
> >>>> could
> >> remember
> >>>> the link, it is actually back somewhere in the xmca archive - 
> >>>> search
> >> Mead
> >>>> if you are interested) which included a number of articles 
> >>>> including contemporaneous reviews and rejoinders.  I read a few 
> >>>> of them and they
> >> were
> >>>> really, really good - and I got a much better understanding of 
> >>>> what
> >> Blumer
> >>>> came to call symbolic interactionism.
> >>>>
> >>>> I would also argue against the author's interpretation of Mead.  
> >>>> In the end he was an instrumental Pragmatist and was focused on process.
> >>>>
> >>>> Anyway, anybody who has insight please let me know.
> >>>>
> >>>> Michael
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: 
> >>>> xmca-l-bounces+mglassman=ehe.ohio-state.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces+mglassman=ehe.ohio-state.edu@mailman.ucsd.
> >>>> ed
> >>>> u]
> >> On
> >>>> Behalf Of Greg Thompson
> >>>> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 11:20 AM
> >>>> To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu
> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] G. H. Mead and Harvey Sacks
> >>>>
> >>>> Interesting article by George Psathas about G. H. Mead and Harvey 
> >>>> Sacks
> >> if
> >>>> anyone is interested:
> >>>> http://www.todayscience.org/SST/article/sst.v1i1p24.pdf
> >>>>
> >>>> -greg
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> >>>> Assistant Professor
> >>>> Department of Anthropology
> >>>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> >>>> Brigham Young University
> >>>> Provo, UT 84602
> >>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Ellen Scully-Russ, Ed.D.
> >>> Associate Professor, Human and Organizational Learning The 
> >>> Graduate School of Education and Human Development The George 
> >>> Washington University
> >>> 44983 Knoll Square, Suite 147
> >>> Ashburn, VA 20147
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Both environment and species change in the course of time, and thus 
> > ecological niches are not stable and given forever (Polotova & 
> > Storch, Ecological Niche, 2008)
>
>
>
>

--
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: MCA2011-Psychology of Art.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 164342 bytes
Desc: MCA2011-Psychology of Art.pdf
Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20150714/1600cea4/attachment.pdf 