[Xmca-l] Re: Solids and Liquids/Entities and dynamic flows

Sat Aug 6 16:47:01 PDT 2016

That fits my understanding, Greg.
More on non-linear modeling and its discontents in forthcoming MCA, maybe
online now.

mike

On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 4:04 PM, <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, mike, and as you have pointed out before the scale issue applies not
> just to timescales but also to spatial scales. At the sub-atomic level, the
> table appears to be mostly empty space whose thingy-ness is up for grabs.
> At the quantum level, it truly can be said, "all that is solid..."
>
> Greg
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Aug 6, 2016, at 12:58 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Rod, Larry, Rein, et al--
> >
> > I, like Rein, worry about the cup metaphor. I was writing quickly and
> using
> > the cup as only one example. In some ways an unfortunate example, The
> > spilled liquid could be absorbed by a table cloth, fall through slats in
> > the floor, etc. Contained, managed .....
> > The cup metaphor is used widely in connection with the term, context,
> which
> > Ray McDermott criticized effectively back about 1993 in the Chaiklin/Lave
> > book on activity and practice.
> >
> > I would like to suggest an additional way to think about solidity. In
> terms
> > of the time scale of change.
> >
> > I often give the example of a table. A table seems like a good candidate
> > for a solid object. In discussing this in class, I sometimes slam my hand
> > unexpectdly again the desk of podium and everyone jumps while i have to
> > nurse my hand which is red and it stings.
> >
> > That table sure seems solid to me and to the audience as well.
> >
> >
> > But the table is only solid relative to another object, in this case me.
> It
> > is changing on a very different time scale, constituted as it is of wood,
> > formica, and a bit of metal. Come back in a thousand years and all that
> > will be left of that table, if that much, will be the metal parts, even
> if
> > the table is not recycled by human beings and global warming or war does
> > not de-compose the table along the way.
> >
> > The issue of scale is beautifully illustrated in "Powers of Ten," a
> > ten-minute film on line if you enter the title. Starting with a scale
> that
> > encompasses two people lying on a blanket along the lake shore in Chicago
> > and goes out ten powers, and then rapidly reverses and goes powers of ten
> > micro into the constituents of matter. Perceptually, what is solid and
> what
> > is empty space changes dynamically as one moves along the scales.
> >
> > Hopefully useful.
> > mike
> >
> >> On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 10:04 AM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks for forwarding, Peg et al.
> >> mike
> >>
> >>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Peg Griffin <Peg.Griffin@att.net>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> down.cenet.org.cn/upfile/19/20064111162198.pdf  but it downloads the
> >>> whole 390 + pagebook
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman
> >>> .ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole
> >>> Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2016 11:22 AM
> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Solids and Liquids/Entities and dynamic flows
> >>>
> >>> My apologies for not appending the reference. For some reason part of
> my
> >>> message disappeared, the ref included. Odd wanderings of fingers not
> under
> >>> proper control. I only have this book in hard copy. If anyone has it
> in a
> >>> pdf, please send to the group.
> >>> If nothing turns up in the next day or so I will scan the chapter and
> >>> post it. I do not love all that it has to say, but it seems worthwhile
> for
> >>> those interested in the issues.
> >>>
> >>> mike
> >>>
> >>> Adams, G., & Markus, H.R., (2003). Toward a conception of culture
> >>> suitable for a social psychology of culture. In, M. Schaller, M., &
> C.S.
> >>> Crandall (Eds.). *The Psychological Foundations of Culture. Erlbaum.
> >>> Mahwah, NJ. pp.
> >>> 335-360.*
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Rod Parker-Rees <
> >>> R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Many thanks for this, Mike.
> >>>>
> >>>> I too would love to read this article. I am particularly interested in
> >>>> the way many cultures (some more than others) tend to nail down flows
> >>>> and processes by turning verbs into nouns. While there is a
> >>>> developmental model which emphasises flow and change there are others
> >>>> which aim to halt or dam the flow by identifying stages (like locks
> >>>> along a river?) which can be thought about more as things. And there
> >>>> are versions of social psychology which focus more on relationships,
> >>> interactions and intersubjectivity.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think there is something about the necessary abstractness of
> >>>> concepts (which have to be sufficiently pulled out from specific
> >>>> contexts to allow them to be shared) that draws them towards
> >>>> reification, turning a flow into a thing (the river, the flow!). But
> >>>> in our lived experience the past runs into the present and the future
> >>>> also shapes the flow. I think the idea of perezhivanie catches this
> >>>> idea of a reciprocity between our past social experiences and the way
> >>> we make sense of what flows our way.
> >>>>
> >>>> Sorry if this seems vague and fluid!
> >>>>
> >>>> All the best,
> >>>>
> >>>> Rod
> >>>>
> >>>> On 6 Aug 2016 1:23 am, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> >>>> I stumbled over an article on the "the psychological foundations of
> >>>> culture" with a summary/discussion article by Adams and Markus. (ref
> >>>> below). The authors contrast two prominent definitions/theories of
> >>>> culture prominent in the literature on the relationship between
> >>>> culture and human psychological processes. The characterization struck
> >>>> me forcefully as an example of Bauman's solid-liquid distinction in a
> >>>> different discourse stream, providing food for thought on the topic of
> >>>> mind, culture, and activity.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> One approach is closely related to developmental approaches such as my
> >>>> own, Barbara Rogoff, Patricia Greenfield, Mike Tomasello). It traces
> >>>> its origins to ploughshares and agriculture, the process of making
> >>>> things grow, nurturing. a process transpiring over time. The other
> >>>> (Social Psychology) adopts "the customary beliefs, social forms, of a
> >>>> racial, religious, or social group."
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The first, developmental approach is said to view "culture as dynamic
> >>>> process or flowing medium" while the second, social psychology view is
> >>>> described as an "entity conception of culture." The entity conception
> >>>> "implies a conception of culture as a relatively 'fixed' system of
> >>>> "customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits." It also
> >>>> associates this system with readily identifiable 'racial, religious,
> or
> >>> social group."
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The authors then list "several undesireable consequences" of adopting
> >>>> the entity point of view. I found these very interesting. I will just
> >>>> list them. If there is sufficient interest I can get a scan of the
> >>> chapter made.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Stereotyping
> >>>>
> >>>> Homogenizing
> >>>>
> >>>> Essentializing
> >>>>
> >>>> Reifying
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> There is, unfortunately, no similar list for the liquid,
> >>>> developmental, perspective. Liquids, Bauman remind us can spill and
> >>>> spoil the rug and need to be contained. They flow, to be sure, but
> >>>> that flow is constrained by a cup.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The authors adopt a view they call "culture as patterns."
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The juxtaposition of these readings and the ongoing discussion of the
> >>>> 11 ox paintings has induced me to think again about long standing
> >>>> ideas. Always enlightening. Thanks.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> mike
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
> >>>> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch
> >>>> ________________________________
> >>>> [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.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
> >>> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
> object
> >> that creates history. Ernst Boesch
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
> object
> > that creates history. Ernst Boesch
>
>

-- 

It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an object
that creates history. Ernst Boesch