From jgregmcverry@gmail.com Sat Mar 2 07:17:31 2019 From: jgregmcverry@gmail.com (Greg Mcverry) Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2019 10:17:31 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Conceptual Models in CHI or Socio Technical Systems Message-ID: Hello everyone, As many of you know I am an active member an open source community #IndieWeb.. We have used a model to represent the software gaol called generations: https://indieweb.org/generations We want to rethink the model, for background discussion see: thttps:// chat.indieweb.org/meta/2019-03-02#t1551491484847800 Basically what happened is the model lead to classifying people rather than snapshots of time and software develoipment. So we want a new conceptual model: - Recognize the bidirectional relationship between the software, the community, the learner. - We stress first way to change the world is to change your self (get a website) - We want to account some people want to increase their skills and learn more complicated tech - Others may have all the skills but not want to be bothered - We also do not address the economic role social media plays..using their capital to ensure dominance..not sure we need to This will be a long term project as we try to reconceptualize our tiny effort to save the web from corporate power. I am reading up a bit on "systems innovations" from those who take ecological views of socio human technical systems (traditional information processing seems to be be where the generations thinking first came into manufacturing research...though used differently as idea generation or hardware generation) But we want to come at this from multiple perspcetives. Already using Activity Theory but its' too broad. Basically want to rethink that into our context. Anyone know of examples or fields we should check out? (btw if you ever want a self organized learning space to study IndieWeb community is fascinating) Greg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190302/92067f54/attachment.html From h2cmng@yahoo.co.uk Sat Mar 2 14:48:16 2019 From: h2cmng@yahoo.co.uk (peter jones) Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2019 22:48:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Conceptual Models in CHI or Socio Technical Systems In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2055117394.12865330.1551566896817@mail.yahoo.com> Hello Greg and all, The points you raise below and in the (brief look) discussion suggests you might consider as one idea / resource - Hodges' model (better described as) a conceptual framework. Originally created in health care and education in mid-1980s with four purposes: - Reflection and critical thinking; - Person-centered care; - Help bridge the theory - practice gap; - Facilitate holistic care (physical, mental, social...). Hodges' model is broad (like Activity Theory as per your note) but it is also generic, universal, situated and actually 'generational' in that a concept it is based upon is the 'health career'. This is NOT health jobs - professionalism (but can be - as a situation and context) but refers to the idea of 'LIFE CHANCES'. With 'generations' and your aims and objectives there is far more commonality... This concept and the model's structure gives rise to four knowledge domains. Your references to brainstorming, illustration, framing, 'spaces' and diagrams also 'fit'. There is a paper on the model's socio-technical applications: Jones, P. (2009) Socio-Technical Structures, the Scope of Informatics and Hodges? model, IN, Staudinger, R., Ostermann, H., Bettina Staudinger, B. (Eds.), Handbook of Research in Nursing Informatics and Socio-Technical Structures, Idea Group Publishing, Inc. Chap. 11, pp. 160-174. I have attended several events on socio-technical approaches. Additional papers are listed on the blog: http://hodges-model.blogspot.com/ The model can also be related (I believe) to Gardenfor's 'Conceptual Spaces' and Meyer & Land's 'Threshold Concepts' (theoretical underpinnings?). The blog includes many posts on these too and 'sociotechnical' - 'socio-technical'. A key (for your community and 'mine' in health care) is POLITICAL which is one of the four domains. In this respect the model is more relevant now than ever: human rightsinformation accessconsentgovernment policy - climate changemental capacitylawdata securitycorporationsgender politicsAIdemographic change - employmentmigrationpopulismfake news .... I still maintain the ambition to create online a 'reflective workbench'. Even your 'users' with skills but without motivation can be represented in Hodges' model. The (INDIVIDUAL) intra- interpersonal domain which includes - cognition, beliefs, attitudes, 'personality', values, trust, competence, motivation, emotion, mood, education, aptitude, memory ... While socio-technical operates diagonally in the model, there are other disciplinary bridges: SOCIO-ECONOMICPHYSICO-POLITICALPSYCHO-SOMATICMIND-BODY BIO-PSYCHO-SOCIALGEO-POLITICAL[SUBJECTIVE - OBJECTIVE][QUALITATIVE - QUANTITATIVE] ... I'd be pleased to try to answer any questions and f/w papers if needed. Also keen to network and potentially collaborate. I hope this is some help Greg? Peter Jones Community Mental Health Nurse & Researcher CMHT Brookside Aughton Street Ormskirk L39 3BH, UK Blogging at "Welcome to the QUAD" http://hodges-model.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/h2cm On Saturday, 2 March 2019, 15:19:49 GMT, Greg Mcverry wrote: Hello everyone, As many of you know I am an active member an open source community #IndieWeb.. We have used a model to represent the software gaol called generations:?https://indieweb.org/generations We want to rethink the model, for background discussion see:?thttps://chat.indieweb.org/meta/2019-03-02#t1551491484847800 Basically what happened is the model lead to classifying people rather than snapshots of time and software develoipment. So we want a new conceptual model: - Recognize the bidirectional relationship between the software, the community, the learner. - We stress first way to change the world is to change your self (get a website) - We want to account some people want to increase their skills and learn more complicated tech - Others may have all the skills but not want to be bothered - We also do not address the economic role social media plays..using their capital to ensure dominance..not sure we need to This will be a long term project as we try to reconceptualize our tiny effort to save the web from corporate power. I am reading up a bit on "systems innovations" from those who take ecological views of socio human technical systems? (traditional information processing seems to be be where the generations thinking first came into manufacturing research...though used differently as idea generation or hardware generation) But we want to come at this from multiple perspcetives. Already using Activity Theory but its' too broad. Basically want to rethink that into our context. Anyone know of examples or fields we should check out? (btw if you ever want a self organized learning space to study IndieWeb community is fascinating) Greg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190302/9f64ad41/attachment.html From jgregmcverry@gmail.com Sun Mar 3 04:34:49 2019 From: jgregmcverry@gmail.com (Greg Mcverry) Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 07:34:49 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Conceptual Models in CHI or Socio Technical Systems In-Reply-To: <2055117394.12865330.1551566896817@mail.yahoo.com> References: <2055117394.12865330.1551566896817@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Wow this is great, I can't wait to dig in. Sharing some resources I found in my research https://quickthoughts.jgregorymcverry.com/2019/03/02/explaining-the-success-of-emerging-technologies-by-innovation-system-functioning https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:81b7a378-fe87-4a43-8f34-3134d5fa0433/datastream/OBJ/download It is all political and we believe the first step to restoring a people centric web is to start with one's own site. You can't understand how truth gets shaped online until you shape your own.. I f anyone did wanted to get started and get a website up and running we run free events all the time. https://indieWeb.org/Events Once again thanks for the resources, now it has me thinking that tge learning as see isn't just cognitive apprenticeships but more agentive apprenticeships, learner driven goals mediated by both people and networks who share a common vision. On Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 5:48 PM peter jones wrote: > Hello Greg and all, > > The points you raise below and in the (brief look) discussion suggests you > might consider as one idea / resource - Hodges' model (better described as) > a conceptual framework. > > Originally created in health care and education in mid-1980s with four > purposes: > > 1. Reflection and critical thinking; > 2. Person-centered care; > 3. Help bridge the theory - practice gap; > 4. Facilitate holistic care (physical, mental, social...). > > > Hodges' model is broad (like Activity Theory as per your note) but it is > also generic, universal, situated and actually 'generational' in that a > concept it is based upon is the 'health career'. > > This is NOT health jobs - professionalism (but can be - as a situation and > context) but refers to the idea of 'LIFE CHANCES'. > > With 'generations' and your aims and objectives there is far more > commonality... > > This concept and the model's structure gives rise to four knowledge > domains. > > Your references to brainstorming, illustration, framing, 'spaces' and > diagrams also 'fit'. > > There is a paper on the model's socio-technical applications: > > Jones, P. (2009) Socio-Technical Structures, the Scope of Informatics and > Hodges? model > , > IN, Staudinger, R., Ostermann, H., Bettina Staudinger, B. (Eds.), Handbook > of Research in Nursing Informatics and Socio-Technical Structures, Idea > Group Publishing, Inc. Chap. 11, pp. 160-174. > > I have attended several events on socio-technical approaches. > > Additional papers are listed on the blog: > > http://hodges-model.blogspot.com/ > > The model can also be related (I believe) to Gardenfor's 'Conceptual > Spaces' and Meyer & Land's 'Threshold Concepts' (theoretical > underpinnings?). > > The blog includes many posts on these too and 'sociotechnical' - > 'socio-technical'. > > A key (for your community and 'mine' in health care) is POLITICAL which is > one of the four domains. > > In this respect the model is more relevant now than ever: > > human rights > information access > consent > government policy - climate change > mental capacity > law > data security > corporations > gender politics > AI > demographic change - employment > migration > populism > fake news > .... > > I still maintain the ambition to create online a 'reflective workbench'. > > Even your 'users' with skills but without motivation can be represented in > Hodges' model. > > The (INDIVIDUAL) intra- interpersonal domain which includes - cognition, > beliefs, attitudes, 'personality', values, trust, competence, motivation, > emotion, mood, education, aptitude, memory ... > > While socio-technical operates diagonally in the model, there are other > disciplinary bridges: > > SOCIO-ECONOMIC > PHYSICO-POLITICAL > PSYCHO-SOMATIC > MIND-BODY > BIO-PSYCHO-SOCIAL > GEO-POLITICAL > [SUBJECTIVE - OBJECTIVE] > [QUALITATIVE - QUANTITATIVE] > ... > > I'd be pleased to try to answer any questions and f/w papers if needed. > Also keen to network and potentially collaborate. > > I hope this is some help Greg? > > Peter Jones > Community Mental Health Nurse & Researcher > CMHT Brookside > Aughton Street > Ormskirk L39 3BH, UK > Blogging at "Welcome to the QUAD" > > http://hodges-model.blogspot.com/ > > > http://twitter.com/h2cm > > > > > On Saturday, 2 March 2019, 15:19:49 GMT, Greg Mcverry < > jgregmcverry@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > As many of you know I am an active member an open source community > #IndieWeb.. > > We have used a model to represent the software gaol called generations: > https://indieweb.org/generations > > We want to rethink the model, for background discussion see: thttps:// > chat.indieweb.org/meta/2019-03-02#t1551491484847800 > > Basically what happened is the model lead to classifying people rather > than snapshots of time and software develoipment. > > So we want a new conceptual model: > > > - Recognize the bidirectional relationship between the software, the > community, the learner. > - We stress first way to change the world is to change your self (get > a website) > - We want to account some people want to increase their skills and > learn more complicated tech > - Others may have all the skills but not want to be bothered > - We also do not address the economic role social media plays..using > their capital to ensure dominance..not sure we need to > > > This will be a long term project as we try to reconceptualize our tiny > effort to save the web from corporate power. > > I am reading up a bit on "systems innovations" from those who take > ecological views of socio human technical systems > > (traditional information processing seems to be be where the generations > thinking first came into manufacturing research...though used differently > as idea generation or hardware generation) > > But we want to come at this from multiple perspcetives. Already using > Activity Theory but its' too broad. Basically want to rethink that into our > context. > > Anyone know of examples or fields we should check out? > > (btw if you ever want a self organized learning space to study IndieWeb > community is fascinating) > > Greg > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190303/2527457d/attachment.html From jgregmcverry@gmail.com Sun Mar 3 11:31:11 2019 From: jgregmcverry@gmail.com (Greg Mcverry) Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 14:31:11 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Conceptual Models in CHI or Socio Technical Systems In-Reply-To: References: <2055117394.12865330.1551566896817@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Peter, Here is my initial attempts: https://jgregorymcverry.com/SyNatIndieWeb.html I want to focus the model you shared at the the top system level. On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 7:34 AM Greg Mcverry wrote: > Wow this is great, I can't wait to dig in. > > Sharing some resources I found in my research > > > https://quickthoughts.jgregorymcverry.com/2019/03/02/explaining-the-success-of-emerging-technologies-by-innovation-system-functioning > > > https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:81b7a378-fe87-4a43-8f34-3134d5fa0433/datastream/OBJ/download > > It is all political and we believe the first step to restoring a people > centric web is to start with one's own site. You can't understand how truth > gets shaped online until you shape your own.. > > I f anyone did wanted to get started and get a website up and running we > run free events all the time. https://indieWeb.org/Events > > Once again thanks for the resources, now it has me thinking that tge > learning as see isn't just cognitive apprenticeships but more agentive > apprenticeships, learner driven goals mediated by both people and networks > who share a common vision. > > > On Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 5:48 PM peter jones wrote: > >> Hello Greg and all, >> >> The points you raise below and in the (brief look) discussion suggests >> you might consider as one idea / resource - Hodges' model (better described >> as) a conceptual framework. >> >> Originally created in health care and education in mid-1980s with four >> purposes: >> >> 1. Reflection and critical thinking; >> 2. Person-centered care; >> 3. Help bridge the theory - practice gap; >> 4. Facilitate holistic care (physical, mental, social...). >> >> >> Hodges' model is broad (like Activity Theory as per your note) but it is >> also generic, universal, situated and actually 'generational' in that a >> concept it is based upon is the 'health career'. >> >> This is NOT health jobs - professionalism (but can be - as a situation >> and context) but refers to the idea of 'LIFE CHANCES'. >> >> With 'generations' and your aims and objectives there is far more >> commonality... >> >> This concept and the model's structure gives rise to four knowledge >> domains. >> >> Your references to brainstorming, illustration, framing, 'spaces' and >> diagrams also 'fit'. >> >> There is a paper on the model's socio-technical applications: >> >> Jones, P. (2009) Socio-Technical Structures, the Scope of Informatics >> and Hodges? model >> , >> IN, Staudinger, R., Ostermann, H., Bettina Staudinger, B. (Eds.), Handbook >> of Research in Nursing Informatics and Socio-Technical Structures, Idea >> Group Publishing, Inc. Chap. 11, pp. 160-174. >> >> I have attended several events on socio-technical approaches. >> >> Additional papers are listed on the blog: >> >> http://hodges-model.blogspot.com/ >> >> The model can also be related (I believe) to Gardenfor's 'Conceptual >> Spaces' and Meyer & Land's 'Threshold Concepts' (theoretical >> underpinnings?). >> >> The blog includes many posts on these too and 'sociotechnical' - >> 'socio-technical'. >> >> A key (for your community and 'mine' in health care) is POLITICAL which >> is one of the four domains. >> >> In this respect the model is more relevant now than ever: >> >> human rights >> information access >> consent >> government policy - climate change >> mental capacity >> law >> data security >> corporations >> gender politics >> AI >> demographic change - employment >> migration >> populism >> fake news >> .... >> >> I still maintain the ambition to create online a 'reflective workbench'. >> >> Even your 'users' with skills but without motivation can be represented >> in Hodges' model. >> >> The (INDIVIDUAL) intra- interpersonal domain which includes - cognition, >> beliefs, attitudes, 'personality', values, trust, competence, motivation, >> emotion, mood, education, aptitude, memory ... >> >> While socio-technical operates diagonally in the model, there are other >> disciplinary bridges: >> >> SOCIO-ECONOMIC >> PHYSICO-POLITICAL >> PSYCHO-SOMATIC >> MIND-BODY >> BIO-PSYCHO-SOCIAL >> GEO-POLITICAL >> [SUBJECTIVE - OBJECTIVE] >> [QUALITATIVE - QUANTITATIVE] >> ... >> >> I'd be pleased to try to answer any questions and f/w papers if needed. >> Also keen to network and potentially collaborate. >> >> I hope this is some help Greg? >> >> Peter Jones >> Community Mental Health Nurse & Researcher >> CMHT Brookside >> Aughton Street >> Ormskirk L39 3BH, UK >> Blogging at "Welcome to the QUAD" >> >> http://hodges-model.blogspot.com/ >> >> >> http://twitter.com/h2cm >> >> >> >> >> On Saturday, 2 March 2019, 15:19:49 GMT, Greg Mcverry < >> jgregmcverry@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> Hello everyone, >> >> As many of you know I am an active member an open source community >> #IndieWeb.. >> >> We have used a model to represent the software gaol called generations: >> https://indieweb.org/generations >> >> We want to rethink the model, for background discussion see: thttps:// >> chat.indieweb.org/meta/2019-03-02#t1551491484847800 >> >> Basically what happened is the model lead to classifying people rather >> than snapshots of time and software develoipment. >> >> So we want a new conceptual model: >> >> >> - Recognize the bidirectional relationship between the software, the >> community, the learner. >> - We stress first way to change the world is to change your self (get >> a website) >> - We want to account some people want to increase their skills and >> learn more complicated tech >> - Others may have all the skills but not want to be bothered >> - We also do not address the economic role social media plays..using >> their capital to ensure dominance..not sure we need to >> >> >> This will be a long term project as we try to reconceptualize our tiny >> effort to save the web from corporate power. >> >> I am reading up a bit on "systems innovations" from those who take >> ecological views of socio human technical systems >> >> (traditional information processing seems to be be where the generations >> thinking first came into manufacturing research...though used differently >> as idea generation or hardware generation) >> >> But we want to come at this from multiple perspcetives. Already using >> Activity Theory but its' too broad. Basically want to rethink that into our >> context. >> >> Anyone know of examples or fields we should check out? >> >> (btw if you ever want a self organized learning space to study IndieWeb >> community is fascinating) >> >> Greg >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190303/2bf3d92b/attachment.html From jgregmcverry@gmail.com Thu Mar 7 05:55:01 2019 From: jgregmcverry@gmail.com (Greg Mcverry) Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 08:55:01 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering Message-ID: I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the related idea of knowledge brokering but find the free market/enterprise thinking problematic. Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I will teach you since you help the community" I know that is over simplified but something been bugging me about this for a long time, simply haven't found a better alternative or formulated my thinking. Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge development and diffusion that occurs between both agents and networks. Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190307/e3b25baa/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Thu Mar 7 06:00:13 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 01:00:13 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf material for your brainstorming. andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: > I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the > related idea of knowledge brokering but find the free > market/enterprise thinking problematic. > > Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time > and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I > will teach you since you help the community" > > I know that is over simplified but something been bugging > me about this for a long time, simply haven't found a > better alternative or formulated my thinking. > > Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships > and recasting it as agentive apprenticeship to get at the > bidirectional knowledge development and diffusion that > occurs between both agents and networks. > > Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190308/96b79ae3/attachment.html From jgregmcverry@gmail.com Thu Mar 7 07:20:22 2019 From: jgregmcverry@gmail.com (Greg Mcverry) Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 10:20:22 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> Message-ID: Thank you, this is perfect...There is a thread in all the social capital research that always bugged me. This gets at it. On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 9:01 AM Andy Blunden wrote: > Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? > > https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf > > material for your brainstorming. > > andy > ------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: > > I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the related idea of > knowledge brokering but find the free market/enterprise thinking > problematic. > > Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time and learning gets > defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I will teach you since you help the > community" > > I know that is over simplified but something been bugging me about this > for a long time, simply haven't found a better alternative or formulated my > thinking. > > Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships and recasting it > as agentive apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge > development and diffusion that occurs between both agents and networks. > > Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190307/d3e54f10/attachment.html From lsmolucha@hotmail.com Thu Mar 7 09:22:38 2019 From: lsmolucha@hotmail.com (Larry Smolucha) Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 17:22:38 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Hegel and Social Movements In-Reply-To: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> References: , <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> Message-ID: Message from Francine: Andy, Do you have a book on Hegel and Social Movements being published this year??? My son has become very interested in Hegel as part of his graduate school studies. ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2019 8:00 AM To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf material for your brainstorming. andy ________________________________ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the related idea of knowledge brokering but find the free market/enterprise thinking problematic. Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I will teach you since you help the community" I know that is over simplified but something been bugging me about this for a long time, simply haven't found a better alternative or formulated my thinking. Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge development and diffusion that occurs between both agents and networks. Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190307/4dfaee65/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Thu Mar 7 17:12:40 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 12:12:40 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Hegel and Social Movements In-Reply-To: References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> Message-ID: <520e66aa-287f-dd74-0a91-b0010ef3a203@marxists.org> It should have been published in April, but unfortunately the husband of the series production manager has been struck by cancer and understandably production has been delayed. Last I heard, it was due out in July though. If you can send me off-line your son's email address I will send him a PDF of the whole book. In the meantime see https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/works/on-hegel.htm Thanks Francine. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 8/03/2019 4:22 am, Larry Smolucha wrote: > Message from Francine: > > Andy, > > Do you have a book on *Hegel and Social Movements* being > published this year??? > My son has become very interested in Hegel as part of his > graduate school studies. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Andy > Blunden > *Sent:* Thursday, March 7, 2019 8:00 AM > *To:* xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and > Knowledge Brokering > > Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? > > https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf > > material for your brainstorming. > > andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: >> I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the >> related idea of knowledge brokering but find the free >> market/enterprise thinking problematic. >> >> Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time >> and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I >> will teach you since you help the community" >> >> I know that is over simplified but something been bugging >> me about this for a long time, simply haven't found a >> better alternative or formulated my thinking. >> >> Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships >> and recasting it as agentive apprenticeship to get at the >> bidirectional knowledge development and diffusion that >> occurs between both agents and networks. >> >> Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190308/0b5cf8f2/attachment.html From martincommatom@gmail.com Thu Mar 7 17:39:45 2019 From: martincommatom@gmail.com (Tom Martin) Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 20:39:45 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts Message-ID: Hello XMCA, Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people with complementary interests. I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further illustrate the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. A million thanks in advance, Tom Martin ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim that learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons that extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning their perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for meaning-making. This conception of boat building as a medium through which our fundamental mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to a vision of craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal growth rather than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded education, which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with others in society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we support one another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily incompatible: *...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.)* In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190307/7a57c92d/attachment.html From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Thu Mar 7 18:22:21 2019 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 21:22:21 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Dr. Martin, Your brief description is quite impressive and timely. I would love to communicate with you on these issues. Is there a way to access your full dissertation? Kind regards, Robert Lake On Thu, Mar 7, 2019, 8:41 PM Tom Martin wrote: > Hello XMCA, > > Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on > this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this > question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational > education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their > market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, > through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. > > My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is > interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have > recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I > would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and > perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people > with complementary interests. > > I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further illustrate > the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at > https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. > > A million thanks in advance, > > Tom Martin > > > > > ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim that > learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons that > extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning their > perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are > introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can > relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a > short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not > entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it > does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental > mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings > with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop > allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and > context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, > exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for > meaning-making. > > This conception of boat building as a medium through which our fundamental > mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to a vision of > craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal growth rather > than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, > competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded education, > which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with others in > society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we support one > another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, > intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily incompatible: > > *...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it > with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted > with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be > liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is > freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities > (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.)* > > In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey > (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a > liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue > that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of > educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What > does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal > of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social > world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus > on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, > the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived > of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I > provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining > tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the > aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes > apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. > My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the > technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively > understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in > their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. > > In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the > learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal > education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who > would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides > the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those > traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal > education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the > world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a > good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for > instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that > the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of > ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in > physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and > numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be > considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, > especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual > understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon > which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether > opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale > craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) > suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190307/c0d0dc23/attachment.html From mcole@ucsd.edu Thu Mar 7 18:40:36 2019 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 18:40:36 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I agree with Robert There are a lot of people in NYC and the East Coast who would find your work interesting. How about sending an article to MCA to spread the word? Mike Cole On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 5:42 PM Tom Martin wrote: > Hello XMCA, > > Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on > this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this > question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational > education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their > market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, > through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. > > My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is > interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have > recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I > would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and > perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people > with complementary interests. > > I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further illustrate > the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at > https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. > > A million thanks in advance, > > Tom Martin > > > > > ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim that > learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons that > extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning their > perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are > introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can > relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a > short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not > entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it > does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental > mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings > with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop > allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and > context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, > exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for > meaning-making. > > This conception of boat building as a medium through which our fundamental > mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to a vision of > craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal growth rather > than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, > competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded education, > which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with others in > society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we support one > another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, > intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily incompatible: > > *...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it > with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted > with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be > liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is > freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities > (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.)* > > In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey > (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a > liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue > that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of > educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What > does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal > of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social > world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus > on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, > the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived > of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I > provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining > tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the > aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes > apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. > My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the > technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively > understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in > their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. > > In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the > learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal > education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who > would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides > the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those > traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal > education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the > world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a > good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for > instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that > the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of > ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in > physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and > numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be > considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, > especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual > understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon > which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether > opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale > craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) > suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. > -- Who says development is not a life long process has either not lived long enough, or has lived too long. Anon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190307/5b8bf104/attachment.html From a.j.gil@ils.uio.no Thu Mar 7 22:45:16 2019 From: a.j.gil@ils.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 06:45:16 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1552027516061.83933@ils.uio.no> Yes Tom, this topic would definitely be of interest to MCA readership. Cultural Praxis, culturalpraxis.net, may be yet another platform where to post your interest and see whether people with similar interests chime in. In the European context, I know a recently graduated PhD working in Helsinki, Liuba Vetoshkina, who wrote a thesis (or at least part of it) about traditional building of wooden boats (as per the references in your thesis). I believe she is member of this list (Liuba, are you there?). https://tuhat.helsinki.fi/portal/en/persons/liubov-vetoshkina(edf7b10b-da7c-426a-b92d-d782bcbf023c).html? Alfredo ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: 08 March 2019 03:40 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts I agree with Robert There are a lot of people in NYC and the East Coast who would find your work interesting. How about sending an article to MCA to spread the word? Mike Cole On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 5:42 PM Tom Martin > wrote: Hello XMCA, Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people with complementary interests. I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further illustrate the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. A million thanks in advance, Tom Martin ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim that learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons that extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning their perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for meaning-making. This conception of boat building as a medium through which our fundamental mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to a vision of craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal growth rather than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded education, which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with others in society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we support one another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily incompatible: ...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.) In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. -- Who says development is not a life long process has either not lived long enough, or has lived too long. Anon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190308/08abd46d/attachment.html From julie.waddington@udg.edu Fri Mar 8 00:56:07 2019 From: julie.waddington@udg.edu (JULIE WADDINGTON) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 09:56:07 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55723.83.37.215.239.1552035367.squirrel@montseny.udg.edu> Hello Tom, Although I'm not in a position to respond to your specific question about contacts, I wanted to say that I think this work/focus is totally worthwhile. I once managed the Outreach Training programme for a Women's Centre in the north of England. We organised craft courses (with ERDF funding) for women in severely disadvantaged situations. The educational and personal benefits of these programmes fits entirely with your suggestion that: "practical skills have educational worth beyond their market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfilment." Since today is International Women's Day, I offer no apologies whatsoever if this message appears off-topic ;) Good luck with this very interesting line of research :) Julie > Hello XMCA, > > Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on > this > list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this question. > My interest is in the ???liberal??? side of craft/vocational education ??? > i.e., > > > My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is > interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have > recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I > would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and > perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people > with complementary interests. > > I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further illustrate > the topic I???m asking about. The full text is online at > https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ > (search my name), for anyone curious. > > A million thanks in advance, > > Tom Martin > > > > > ??? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim > that > learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons > that > extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning > their > perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are > introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can > relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in > a > short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ???the feel??? does > not > entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it > does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental > mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings > with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop > allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and > context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, > exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for > meaning-making. > > This conception of boat building as a medium through which our fundamental > mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to a vision of > craft as ???liberal education???, a mode of fostering personal growth > rather > than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, > competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded education, > which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with others in > society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we support one > another???s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, > intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily > incompatible: > > *...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it > with > what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ???Liberal??? is contrasted > with > vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be > liberating ??? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person > is > freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities > (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.)* > > In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey > (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a > liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue > that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of > educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What > does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal > of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social > world, then the outcome might rightly be called ???education???. A strict > focus > on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to > ???training???, > the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived > of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ???craft??? > that I > provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ??? organised practice combining > tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the > aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ??? it > becomes > apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by > definition. > My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the > technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively > understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in > their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. > > In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the > learning > of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal education, I do > not merely mean to defend craft education against those who would see it > as > mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides the logical > foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those traditional > ???liberal arts??? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal education > cannot > result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the world, writing that > ???[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a good > understanding > of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for instance, or > aesthetically??? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that the wooden > boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of ???looking at the > world??? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in physical > objects > and their interrelationships rather than through words and numbers. > Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be considered > well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, especially if, > as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual understanding is our > foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon which other ways of > knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether opportunities to > nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale craftwork is > replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) suggests in > his > final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. > Dra. Julie Waddington Departament de Did?ctiques Espec?fiques Facultat d'Educaci? i Psicologia Universitat de Girona From glassman.13@osu.edu Fri Mar 8 01:11:42 2019 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 09:11:42 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Tom, You might find a very receptive audience with the John Dewey Society and related thinkers. The idea of craftwork being of high value is a central tenet in Democracy and Education, something we have lost with STEM education (even though STEM education was originally based on Dewey type principles ? go figure ? or better don?t try). Vocational education and vocational schools in the United States were originally based on an (I would argue misinterpretation) of Dewey in that they really didn?t buy in completely to the idea of the basic educational worth of practical skills. I am sure there are Dewey schools in the NYC area so that might be a place to start. But I think there is a ready and waiting audience for this type of work. Michael From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu On Behalf Of Tom Martin Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2019 8:40 PM To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts Hello XMCA, Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people with complementary interests. I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further illustrate the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. A million thanks in advance, Tom Martin ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim that learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons that extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning their perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for meaning-making. This conception of boat building as a medium through which our fundamental mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to a vision of craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal growth rather than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded education, which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with others in society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we support one another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily incompatible: ...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.) In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190308/b7804a49/attachment.html From Anne-Nelly.Perret-Clermont@unine.ch Fri Mar 8 02:55:05 2019 From: Anne-Nelly.Perret-Clermont@unine.ch (PERRET-CLERMONT Anne-Nelly) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 10:55:05 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Tom, This idea of craftwork has always been central in vocational training in Switzerland. But it is now under pressure because of the important changes induced by digitalisation of work practices. We have examined some of these questions here: Perret, J.-F. & Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (2011). Apprentice in a changing trade. Charlotte, N.C. USA: Information Age Publishing. A very interesting field open for further studies! Keep us informed, Anne-Nelly Prof. em. Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont Institut de psychologie et ?ducation Facult? des lettres et sciences humaines Universit? de Neuch?tel Espace L. Agassiz 1, CH- 2000 Neuch?tel (Suisse) http://www.unine.ch/ipe/publications/anne_nelly_perret_clermont De : > on behalf of "Glassman, Michael" > R?pondre ? : "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Date : vendredi, 8 mars 2019 ? 10:11 ? : "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Objet : [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts Tom, You might find a very receptive audience with the John Dewey Society and related thinkers. The idea of craftwork being of high value is a central tenet in Democracy and Education, something we have lost with STEM education (even though STEM education was originally based on Dewey type principles ? go figure ? or better don?t try). Vocational education and vocational schools in the United States were originally based on an (I would argue misinterpretation) of Dewey in that they really didn?t buy in completely to the idea of the basic educational worth of practical skills. I am sure there are Dewey schools in the NYC area so that might be a place to start. But I think there is a ready and waiting audience for this type of work. Michael From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > On Behalf Of Tom Martin Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2019 8:40 PM To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts Hello XMCA, Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people with complementary interests. I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further illustrate the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. A million thanks in advance, Tom Martin ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim that learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons that extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning their perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for meaning-making. This conception of boat building as a medium through which our fundamental mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to a vision of craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal growth rather than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded education, which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with others in society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we support one another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily incompatible: ...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.) In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190308/3d779f9d/attachment.html From l.woods@iicedu.org Sat Mar 9 05:03:12 2019 From: l.woods@iicedu.org (Linda Woods, IICE) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 13:03:12 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Xmca-l] Ireland International Conference on Education (IICE-2019): Call for Submissions! In-Reply-To: <1874687302.574112.1552136466735@email.ionos.co.uk> References: <1257356340.574079.1552136302627@email.ionos.co.uk> <1996964225.574090.1552136376672@email.ionos.co.uk> <1874687302.574112.1552136466735@email.ionos.co.uk> Message-ID: <86742361.574136.1552136592471@email.ionos.co.uk> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/ceeaf4b5/attachment.html From robsub@ariadne.org.uk Sat Mar 9 05:23:47 2019 From: robsub@ariadne.org.uk (robsub@ariadne.org.uk) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 13:23:47 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <93090591-a11b-6a78-6102-bc0bd4a3204d@ariadne.org.uk> South east of England, not the east coast of the States, but I like what you're saying so much, Tom, that I feel the urge to comment. Unseasonably warm here, to the extent that everyone has their lawnmower out, ruining what would otherwise be a peaceful weekend. Just a couple of random thoughts. I wrote a blog post a while ago "A university degree in plumbing" which explores related territory. http://acomfortableplace.blogspot.com/2007/09/university-degree-in-plumbing.html And my daughter worked for a couple of years at the National Maritime Museum in Cornwall, which features a lot of boats and occasionally does boat building as part of their programme, thus very clearly linking the craft to the liberal curriculum. Rob On 08/03/2019 10:55, PERRET-CLERMONT Anne-Nelly wrote: > Tom, > This idea of craftwork has always been central in vocational training > ?in Switzerland. But it is now under pressure because of the important > changes induced by digitalisation of work practices. We have examined > some of these questions here: Perret, J.-F. & Perret-Clermont, A.-N. > (2011). /Apprentice in a changing trade./ Charlotte, N.C. USA: > Information Age Publishing. > A very interesting field open for further studies! > Keep us informed, > Anne-Nelly > > Prof. em. Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont > Institut de psychologie et ?ducation Facult? des lettres et sciences > humaines > Universit? de Neuch?tel > Espace L. Agassiz 1, ?CH- 2000 Neuch?tel (Suisse) > http://www.unine.ch/ipe/publications/anne_nelly_perret_clermont > > > > > De?: > on behalf of "Glassman, > Michael" > > R?pondre ??: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > Date?: vendredi, 8 mars 2019 ? 10:11 > ??: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Objet?: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts > > Tom, > > You might find a very receptive audience with the John Dewey Society > and related thinkers.? The idea of craftwork being of high value is a > central tenet in Democracy and Education, something we have lost with > STEM education (even though STEM education was originally based on > Dewey type principles ? go figure ? or better don?t try). Vocational > education and vocational schools in the United States were originally > based on an (I would argue misinterpretation) of Dewey in that they > really didn?t buy in completely to the idea of the basic educational > worth of practical skills.? I am sure there are Dewey schools in the > NYC area so that might be a place to start. But I think there is a > ready and waiting audience for this type of work. > > Michael > > *From:*xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > *On Behalf Of *Tom Martin > *Sent:* Thursday, March 07, 2019 8:40 PM > *To:* xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts > > Hello XMCA, > > Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on > this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this > question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational > education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond > their market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of > understanding, through which learners might find personal and > intellectual fulfillment. > > My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is > interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have > recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite > sparse. I would be very interested in having this conversation in more > depth, and perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able > to find people with complementary interests. > > I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further > illustrate the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at > https://ora.ox.ac.uk/?(search my name), for anyone curious. > > A million thanks in advance, > > Tom Martin > > > > ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim > that learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for > reasons that extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. > In aligning their perception with that of those around them, novices > like myself are introduced to the possible depth of understanding that > perception can relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can > be comprehended in a short glance or with a passing touch. While > getting ?the feel? does not entail developing an entirely new way of > interacting with the world, it does require exploring the extent of > the possibilities of our fundamental mode of understanding, which we > take for granted in our everyday dealings with physical things. > Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop allows the learner to > encounter the myriad layers of meaning and context-bound purposes that > operate at once within such a complex system, exposing him or her to > the full extent of our inherent human capacity for meaning-making. > > This conception of boat building as a medium through which our > fundamental mechanism for understanding the world can be refined > points to a vision of craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of > fostering personal growth rather than solely achieving extrinsic ends > (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, competence at work should still be > a concern in a well-rounded education, which serves as an introduction > to ways of interacting with others in society, fulfilling the > collective functions through which we support one another?s needs (see > Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, intellectual growth > and training for work are not necessarily incompatible: > > /...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it > with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is > contrasted with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, > cannot itself be liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge > through which a person is freed from ignorance, and opened to new > imaginings, new possibilities (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.)/ > > In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey > (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a > liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors > argue that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for > fulfilment of educational aims such as intellectual growth and > personal fulfilment. What does matter is the perspective from which a > subject is taught; if the goal of teaching is to foster new ways of > engaging with the material and social world, then the outcome might > rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus on the production of > finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, the > memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived > of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? > that I provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice > combining tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility > for the aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced > ? it becomes apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal > education, by definition. My analysis throughout this thesis merely > serves to translate into the technical language of philosophy the > premise that craftspeople intuitively understand, that historical ways > of working with tools and materials in their meaningful contexts > demand a highly-sharpened intellect. > > In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the > learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal > education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against > those who would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this > investigation also provides the logical foundation for asking what > craft learning provides that those traditional ?liberal arts? do not. > Peters (1970) argues that a liberal education cannot result in a > single, narrow mode of understanding the world, writing that ?[n]o > scientist should emerge, for instance, without a good understanding of > other ways of looking at the world, historically, for instance, or > aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that the > wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of > ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning > in physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through > words and numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a > person can be considered well educated without refining their > perceptual capacities, especially if, as Heidegger asserts, > pre-reflective perceptual understanding is our foundational mode of > engaging with the world, upon which other ways of knowing are founded. > Unfortunately, one wonders whether opportunities to nurture such > understanding are disappearing as small-scale craftwork is replaced by > mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) suggests in his final > lectures on understanding in the era of technology. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/c85f83b5/attachment.html From simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za Sat Mar 9 09:54:10 2019 From: simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za (Simangele Mayisela) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 17:54:10 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> Message-ID: <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA801339574CD@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> Dear Andy I browsed your ethical politics paper and found it to be moving. I realise my view of social capital has somehow been narrow as only focused on knowledge transfer ? conscious or unconscious. Thanks for providing the background of the concept. At a political and economic level, it reminds me of the South African ?Xolobeni? saga, where a rural community, located on beautiful coastal landscape with indigenous flora in the Eastern Cape is bulldozed by an Aissie mining company who ?obtained? mining rights from the government under the guise that this will bring development and jobs to the community. You can find the images and the news briefs on this social conundrum and the plight of the Exolobeni people on google This is where the need of social solidarity becomes paramount above the idea of social capital. Thanks for sharing?will read this paper in depth. Regards, Simangele From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: 07 March 2019 04:00 PM To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf material for your brainstorming. andy ________________________________ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the related idea of knowledge brokering but find the free market/enterprise thinking problematic. Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I will teach you since you help the community" I know that is over simplified but something been bugging me about this for a long time, simply haven't found a better alternative or formulated my thinking. Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge development and diffusion that occurs between both agents and networks. Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/8860c23d/attachment.html From Peg.Griffin@att.net Sat Mar 9 11:08:00 2019 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 14:08:00 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA801339574CD@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA801339574CD@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> Message-ID: <003701d4d6ab$6ac7d5e0$405781a0$@att.net> How difficult doing social solidarity is in spite of its necessity, right? Here?s an SPLC piece (with a book suggestion within it) that I think some folks probably already have and others might want. It?s called ?If nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest problem?? Keeps on being hard to follow John Lewis into ?good trouble,? doesn?t it? PG It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights marchers so badly that the date became known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. SPLC logo FIGHTING HATE // TEACHING TOLERANCE // SEEKING JUSTICE MARCH 9, 2019 Weekend Read // Issue 121 Peg, It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights marchers so badly that the date became known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. Fifty-four years have passed since that historic march for voting rights, but as the speakers lamented last weekend, we are still fighting for the right to vote today. However, as Rep. John Lewis told a crowd at the Civil Rights Memorial Center in Montgomery as part of the Bloody Sunday anniversary, ?We come with the spirit and the belief that we can change things. We have the power. We have the ability. We can do it.? Doing the hard work of achieving the ideals of the civil rights movement is the message of white academic and diversity trainer Robin DiAngelo?s recent book ?White Fragility.? It has spent seven months near the top of The New York Times bestseller list despite a challenging message to white people, its intended audience: When ? not if ? you perpetuate racism, don?t get defensive . ?In my experience, day in and day out, most white people are absolutely not receptive to finding out their impact on other people,? DiAngelo told Nosheen Iqbal for The Guardian. She recounted the way that ?They insist, ?Well, it?s not me?, or say ?I?m doing my best, what do you want from me??? One problem, DiAngelo says, is that white progressives often define racism as something obvious and violent ? like when police beat civil rights marchers in Selma in 1965 ? when the reality is that it is much more insidious. ?We have to stop thinking about racism simply as someone who says the N-word,? she told Iqbal. ?This book is centered in the white western colonial context, and in that context white people hold institutional power.? But over the course of 20 years of doing trainings around race and diversity, DiAngelo has discovered that white progressives who say they want to be allies to people of color are often nonetheless uncomfortable examining the impact of their own behavior . DiAngelo defines this as white fragility ? the inability of white people to tolerate racial stress. ?I want to build the stamina to handle the discomfort so we don?t retreat in the face of it, because retreating holds the status quo in place, and the status quo is the reproduction of racism,? DiAngelo explained. Without that stamina, white people who discover ways they may have accidentally perpetuated racial inequality and injustice too often ?weaponi[ze their] hurt feelings? by getting indignant and defensive, in turn creating a climate that makes their anxiety more important than the concerns of the people of color around them. As DiAngelo asks, ?If nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest problem? What are white people afraid they will lose by listening?? It can be difficult to know how to do that in the moment. Our guide on how to respond to everyday bigotry can help. So can our guide on 10 ways to fight hate , one of which is to educate yourself through cross-racial conversations, like the kind DiAngelo has been promoting for decades. After all, within the white, western colonial context, DiAngelo points out: ?Racism is a white problem. It was constructed and created by white people and the ultimate responsibility lies with white people. For too long we?ve looked at it as if it were someone else?s problem.? On this anniversary of the march from Selma to Montgomery, when voter suppression is still rampant , police abuses are still violent , and civil rights are far from guaranteed , it could not be more clear. The Editors P.S. Here are some other pieces we think are valuable this week: * Immigration detention has life-changing consequences for sisters by Liz Vinson for the Southern Poverty Law Center * How a black man says he ?outsmarted? a neo-Nazi group and became their new leader by Katie Mettler for The Washington Post * Kneeling during the anthem at Ole Miss: ?I needed to stand up for my rights? by Billy Witz for The New York Times * Dollars on the margins by Matthew Desmond for The New York Times Magazine Was this message forwarded to you? Sign up to receive SPLC updates. Update Preferences | Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Copyright 2019 Follow SPLC Facebook Icon Twitter Icon Youtube Icon Southern Poverty Law Center 400 Washington Avenue Montgomery, AL 36104 334.956.8200 // splcenter.org From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Simangele Mayisela Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2019 12:54 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering Dear Andy I browsed your ethical politics paper and found it to be moving. I realise my view of social capital has somehow been narrow as only focused on knowledge transfer ? conscious or unconscious. Thanks for providing the background of the concept. At a political and economic level, it reminds me of the South African ?Xolobeni? saga, where a rural community, located on beautiful coastal landscape with indigenous flora in the Eastern Cape is bulldozed by an Aissie mining company who ?obtained? mining rights from the government under the guise that this will bring development and jobs to the community. You can find the images and the news briefs on this social conundrum and the plight of the Exolobeni people on google This is where the need of social solidarity becomes paramount above the idea of social capital. Thanks for sharing?will read this paper in depth. Regards, Simangele From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: 07 March 2019 04:00 PM To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf material for your brainstorming. andy _____ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the related idea of knowledge brokering but find the free market/enterprise thinking problematic. Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I will teach you since you help the community" I know that is over simplified but something been bugging me about this for a long time, simply haven't found a better alternative or formulated my thinking. Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge development and diffusion that occurs between both agents and networks. Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/e1a5c228/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 20757 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/e1a5c228/attachment.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 30603 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/e1a5c228/attachment-0001.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 748 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/e1a5c228/attachment.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 826 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/e1a5c228/attachment-0001.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 876 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/e1a5c228/attachment-0002.jpe From andyb@marxists.org Sat Mar 9 16:30:59 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 11:30:59 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: <003701d4d6ab$6ac7d5e0$405781a0$@att.net> References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA801339574CD@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> <003701d4d6ab$6ac7d5e0$405781a0$@att.net> Message-ID: At the moment I am reading W E B Du Bois on the history of the Reconstruction after the American Civil War. Horrific reading in terms of the brutality of the Southern whites' attitudes to the "freedmen" and the system of laws designed to keep them in bondage, but also startling how much of the terms of debate seem not to have changed over a period of 150 years. Du Bois is interesting because he shows how Lincoln never intended to end slavery, but the whole logic of the situation forced his hand, even though he was the first to see that. The depth of the legacy of slavery in the US becomes abundantly clear; every social issue gets racialised. How similar the issues are today as when Du Bois was writing! "Social capital" seemed to count for little, but "human capital" of course, took on a very specific meaning in those days. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 10/03/2019 6:08 am, Peg Griffin wrote: > > How difficult doing social solidarity is in spite of its > necessity, right?? Here?s an SPLC piece (with a book > suggestion within it) that I think some folks probably > already have and others might want.? It?s called ?If > nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest > problem?? > > Keeps on being hard to follow John Lewis into ?good > trouble,? doesn?t it? > > PG > > It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, > in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they > commemorated the day when police beat civil rights > marchers so badly that the date became known the nation > over as Bloody Sunday. > > SPLC logo > > > *FIGHTING HATE // TEACHING TOLERANCE // SEEKING JUSTICE > * > > MARCH 9, 2019 > > *Weekend Read // Issue 121* > > Peg, > > It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, > in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they > commemorated the day when police beat civil rights > marchers so badly that the date became known the nation > over as Bloody Sunday. > > Fifty-four years have passed since that historic march for > voting rights, but as the speakers lamented last weekend, > we are still fighting for the right to vote today. > > However, as Rep. John Lewis told a crowd at the Civil > Rights Memorial Center in Montgomery as part of the Bloody > Sunday anniversary, ?We come with the spirit and the > belief that we can change things. We have the power. We > have the ability. We can do it.? > > Doing the hard work of achieving the ideals of the civil > rights movement is the message of white academic and > diversity trainer Robin DiAngelo?s recent book ?White > Fragility.? It has spent seven months near the top of /The > New York Times/?bestseller list despite a challenging > message to white people, its intended audience: When ??not > if ??you perpetuate racism, don?t get defensive > . > > ?In my experience, day in and day out, most white people > are absolutely not receptive to finding out their impact > on other people,? DiAngelo told Nosheen Iqbal for /The > Guardian/. She recounted the way that ?They insist, ?Well, > it?s not me?, or say ?I?m doing my best, what do you want > from me??? > > One problem, DiAngelo says, is that white progressives > often define racism as something obvious and violent > ??like when police beat civil rights marchers in Selma in > 1965 ??when the reality is that it is much more insidious. > > ?We have to stop thinking about racism simply as someone > who says the N-word,? she told Iqbal. ?This book is > centered in the white western colonial context, and in > that context white people hold institutional power.? > > But over the course of 20 years of doing trainings around > race and diversity, DiAngelo has discovered that white > progressives who say they want to be allies to people of > color are often nonetheless uncomfortable examining the > impact of their own behavior > . > > DiAngelo defines this as white fragility ? the inability > of white people to tolerate racial stress. > > ?I want to build the stamina to handle the discomfort so > we don?t retreat in the face of it, because retreating > holds the status quo in place, and the status quo is the > reproduction of racism,? DiAngelo explained. > > Without that stamina, white people who discover ways they > may have accidentally perpetuated racial inequality and > injustice too often ?weaponi[ze their] hurt feelings? by > getting indignant and defensive, in turn creating a > climate that makes their anxiety more important than the > concerns of the people of color > ?around > them. > > As DiAngelo asks, ?If nobody is racist, why is racism > still America?s biggest problem? What are white people > afraid they will lose by listening?? > > It can be difficult to know how to do that in the moment. > Our guide on how to respond to everyday bigotry > ?can > help. So can our guide on 10 ways to fight hate > , > one of which is to educate yourself through cross-racial > conversations, like the kind DiAngelo has been promoting > for decades. > > After all, within the white, western colonial context, > DiAngelo points out: ?Racism is a white problem. It was > constructed and created by white people and the ultimate > responsibility lies with white people. For too long we?ve > looked at it as if it were someone else?s problem.? > > On this anniversary of the march from Selma to Montgomery, > when voter suppression is still rampant > , > police abuses are still violent > , > and civil rights are far from guaranteed > , > it could not be more clear. > > The Editors > > P.S. Here are some other pieces we think are valuable this > week: > > * Immigration detention has life-changing consequences > for sisters > > by Liz Vinson for the /Southern Poverty Law Center/ > * How a black man says he ?outsmarted? a neo-Nazi group > and became their new leader > > by Katie Mettler for /The Washington Post/ > * Kneeling during the anthem at Ole Miss: ?I needed to > stand up for my rights? > > by Billy Witz for /The New York Times/ > * Dollars on the margins > > by Matthew Desmond for /The New York Times Magazine/ > > *Was this message forwarded to you? Sign up to receive > SPLC updates. > * > > Update Preferences > > | Unsubscribe > > | Privacy Policy > > | Contact Us > > | Copyright 2019 > > > Follow SPLC > > Facebook Icon > Twitter > Icon > Youtube > Icon > > > Southern Poverty Law Center > 400 Washington Avenue > Montgomery, AL 36104 > 334.956.8200 // splcenter.org > > > *From:*xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] *On Behalf Of > *Simangele Mayisela > *Sent:* Saturday, March 09, 2019 12:54 PM > *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and > Knowledge Brokering > > Dear Andy > > I browsed your ?ethical politics paper and found it to be > ?moving. I realise my view of social capital has somehow > been narrow as only focused on knowledge transfer ? > conscious or unconscious. Thanks for providing the > background of the concept. At a political and economic > level, it reminds me of the South African ??Xolobeni? > saga, where a rural community, located on beautiful > coastal ?landscape with indigenous flora in the Eastern > Cape is bulldozed by an Aissie mining company who > ?obtained? mining rights from the government under the > guise that this will bring development and jobs to the > community. ?You can find the images and the news briefs on > this social conundrum and the plight of the Exolobeni > people on google ?This is where the need of social > solidarity becomes paramount above the idea of social > capital. Thanks for sharing?will read this paper in depth. > > Regards, > > Simangele > > *From:*xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] *On Behalf Of > *Andy Blunden > *Sent:* 07 March 2019 04:00 PM > *To:* xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and > Knowledge Brokering > > Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? > > https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf > > material for your brainstorming. > > andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > > On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: > > I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and > the related idea of knowledge brokering but find the > free market/enterprise thinking problematic. > > Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the > time and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I > guess I will teach you since you help the community" > > I know that is over simplified but something been > bugging me about this for a long time, simply haven't > found a better alternative or formulated my thinking. > > Playing with the idea of taking cognitive > apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive > apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge > development and diffusion that occurs between both > agents and networks. > > Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. > > This communication is intended for the addressee only. It > is confidential. If you have received this communication > in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the > original message. You may not copy or disseminate this > communication without the permission of the University. > Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into > agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are > thus advised that the content of this message may not be > legally binding on the University and may contain the > personal views and opinions of the author, which are not > necessarily the views and opinions of The University of > the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between > the University and outsiders are subject to South African > Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/317b776c/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 30603 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/317b776c/attachment.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 748 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/317b776c/attachment.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 826 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/317b776c/attachment-0001.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 876 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/317b776c/attachment-0002.jpg From helenaworthen@gmail.com Sat Mar 9 16:50:24 2019 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 07:50:24 +0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA801339574CD@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> <003701d4d6ab$6ac7d5e0$405781a0$@att.net> Message-ID: Andy and others: Thanks for reading DuBois. The chapter titled ?The White Worker? is living history, the clearest, strongest explanation available of the situation of racism in the US today. This is a chapter one can actually assign to students when they ask ?Why Trump?? Helena > On Mar 10, 2019, at 7:30 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > At the moment I am reading W E B Du Bois on the history of the Reconstruction after the American Civil War. Horrific reading in terms of the brutality of the Southern whites' attitudes to the "freedmen" and the system of laws designed to keep them in bondage, but also startling how much of the terms of debate seem not to have changed over a period of 150 years. Du Bois is interesting because he shows how Lincoln never intended to end slavery, but the whole logic of the situation forced his hand, even though he was the first to see that. The depth of the legacy of slavery in the US becomes abundantly clear; every social issue gets racialised. How similar the issues are today as when Du Bois was writing! > > "Social capital" seemed to count for little, but "human capital" of course, took on a very specific meaning in those days. > Andy > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 10/03/2019 6:08 am, Peg Griffin wrote: >> How difficult doing social solidarity is in spite of its necessity, right? Here?s an SPLC piece (with a book suggestion within it) that I think some folks probably already have and others might want. It?s called ?If nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest problem?? >> Keeps on being hard to follow John Lewis into ?good trouble,? doesn?t it? >> PG >> It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights marchers so badly that the date became known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. >> >> >> >> FIGHTING HATE // TEACHING TOLERANCE // SEEKING JUSTICE >> MARCH 9, 2019 >> Weekend Read // Issue 121 >> Peg, >> >> It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights marchers so badly that the date became known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. >> >> Fifty-four years have passed since that historic march for voting rights, but as the speakers lamented last weekend, we are still fighting for the right to vote today. >> >> However, as Rep. John Lewis told a crowd at the Civil Rights Memorial Center in Montgomery as part of the Bloody Sunday anniversary, ?We come with the spirit and the belief that we can change things. We have the power. We have the ability. We can do it.? >> >> Doing the hard work of achieving the ideals of the civil rights movement is the message of white academic and diversity trainer Robin DiAngelo?s recent book ?White Fragility.? It has spent seven months near the top of The New York Times bestseller list despite a challenging message to white people, its intended audience: When ? not if ? you perpetuate racism, don?t get defensive . >> >> ?In my experience, day in and day out, most white people are absolutely not receptive to finding out their impact on other people,? DiAngelo told Nosheen Iqbal for The Guardian. She recounted the way that ?They insist, ?Well, it?s not me?, or say ?I?m doing my best, what do you want from me??? >> >> One problem, DiAngelo says, is that white progressives often define racism as something obvious and violent ? like when police beat civil rights marchers in Selma in 1965 ? when the reality is that it is much more insidious. >> >> ?We have to stop thinking about racism simply as someone who says the N-word,? she told Iqbal. ?This book is centered in the white western colonial context, and in that context white people hold institutional power.? >> >> But over the course of 20 years of doing trainings around race and diversity, DiAngelo has discovered that white progressives who say they want to be allies to people of color are often nonetheless uncomfortable examining the impact of their own behavior . >> >> DiAngelo defines this as white fragility ? the inability of white people to tolerate racial stress. >> >> ?I want to build the stamina to handle the discomfort so we don?t retreat in the face of it, because retreating holds the status quo in place, and the status quo is the reproduction of racism,? DiAngelo explained. >> >> Without that stamina, white people who discover ways they may have accidentally perpetuated racial inequality and injustice too often ?weaponi[ze their] hurt feelings? by getting indignant and defensive, in turn creating a climate that makes their anxiety more important than the concerns of the people of color around them. >> >> As DiAngelo asks, ?If nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest problem? What are white people afraid they will lose by listening?? >> >> It can be difficult to know how to do that in the moment. Our guide on how to respond to everyday bigotry can help. So can our guide on 10 ways to fight hate , one of which is to educate yourself through cross-racial conversations, like the kind DiAngelo has been promoting for decades. >> >> After all, within the white, western colonial context, DiAngelo points out: ?Racism is a white problem. It was constructed and created by white people and the ultimate responsibility lies with white people. For too long we?ve looked at it as if it were someone else?s problem.? >> >> On this anniversary of the march from Selma to Montgomery, when voter suppression is still rampant , police abuses are still violent , and civil rights are far from guaranteed , it could not be more clear. >> >> The Editors >> >> P.S. Here are some other pieces we think are valuable this week: >> >> Immigration detention has life-changing consequences for sisters by Liz Vinson for the Southern Poverty Law Center >> How a black man says he ?outsmarted? a neo-Nazi group and became their new leader by Katie Mettler for The Washington Post >> Kneeling during the anthem at Ole Miss: ?I needed to stand up for my rights? by Billy Witz for The New York Times >> Dollars on the margins by Matthew Desmond for The New York Times Magazine >> Was this message forwarded to you? Sign up to receive SPLC updates. >> Update Preferences | Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Copyright 2019 >> >> >> >> >> Follow SPLC >> >> Southern Poverty Law Center >> 400 Washington Avenue >> Montgomery, AL 36104 >> 334.956.8200 // splcenter.org >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Simangele Mayisela >> Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2019 12:54 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering >> >> <> >> Dear Andy >> >> I browsed your ethical politics paper and found it to be moving. I realise my view of social capital has somehow been narrow as only focused on knowledge transfer ? conscious or unconscious. Thanks for providing the background of the concept. At a political and economic level, it reminds me of the South African ?Xolobeni? saga, where a rural community, located on beautiful coastal landscape with indigenous flora in the Eastern Cape is bulldozed by an Aissie mining company who ?obtained? mining rights from the government under the guise that this will bring development and jobs to the community. You can find the images and the news briefs on this social conundrum and the plight of the Exolobeni people on google This is where the need of social solidarity becomes paramount above the idea of social capital. Thanks for sharing?will read this paper in depth. >> >> Regards, >> Simangele >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: 07 March 2019 04:00 PM >> To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering >> >> Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? >> >> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf >> material for your brainstorming. >> >> andy >> >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: >> I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the related idea of knowledge brokering but find the free market/enterprise thinking problematic. >> >> Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I will teach you since you help the community" >> >> I know that is over simplified but something been bugging me about this for a long time, simply haven't found a better alternative or formulated my thinking. >> >> Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge development and diffusion that occurs between both agents and networks. >> >> Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. >> This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/500d1060/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 30603 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/500d1060/attachment.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 748 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/500d1060/attachment.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 826 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/500d1060/attachment-0001.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 876 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/500d1060/attachment-0002.jpg From andyb@marxists.org Sat Mar 9 17:01:21 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:01:21 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA801339574CD@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> <003701d4d6ab$6ac7d5e0$405781a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <52d36ceb-4ae5-b9e7-2321-cd4a82e2e212@marxists.org> Yes. I haven't got to that chapter yet, but he has already made this clear. It also shows how the issue of poverty and the labour issue became transmuted into the issue of the emancipated slaves. This is what I meant by the "racialisation" of American politics, a problem which is still disabling progressive politics in the US. We have racism in Australia. No doubt about that. Anti-immigrant racism is, in my view, utterly ineffective in changing the political landscape overall, despite heaping misery on whoever the latest wave of immigrants happens to be. But after a few years, the colour of the next wave changes, a new generation grows up and we move on. The racism against the indigenous people remains and it is a terrible problem for us. But I don't think it poisons the entire political landscape like the legacy of slavery does in the US. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 10/03/2019 11:50 am, Helena Worthen wrote: > Andy and others: > > Thanks for reading DuBois. The chapter titled ?The White > Worker? is living history, the clearest, strongest > explanation available of the situation of racism in the US > today. This is a chapter one can actually assign to > students when they ask ?Why Trump?? > > Helena > >> On Mar 10, 2019, at 7:30 AM, Andy Blunden >> > wrote: >> >> At the moment I am reading W E B Du Bois on the history >> of the Reconstruction after the American Civil War. >> Horrific reading in terms of the brutality of the >> Southern whites' attitudes to the "freedmen" and the >> system of laws designed to keep them in bondage, but also >> startling how much of the terms of debate seem not to >> have changed over a period of 150 years. Du Bois is >> interesting because he shows how Lincoln never intended >> to end slavery, but the whole logic of the situation >> forced his hand, even though he was the first to see >> that. The depth of the legacy of slavery in the US >> becomes abundantly clear; every social issue gets >> racialised. How similar the issues are today as when Du >> Bois was writing! >> >> "Social capital" seemed to count for little, but "human >> capital" of course, took on a very specific meaning in >> those days. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 10/03/2019 6:08 am, Peg Griffin wrote: >>> >>> How difficult doing social solidarity is in spite of its >>> necessity, right?? Here?s an SPLC piece (with a book >>> suggestion within it) that I think some folks probably >>> already have and others might want.? It?s called ?If >>> nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest >>> problem?? >>> >>> Keeps on being hard to follow John Lewis into ?good >>> trouble,? doesn?t it? >>> >>> PG >>> >>> It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, >>> in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as >>> they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights >>> marchers so badly that the date became known the nation >>> over as Bloody Sunday. >>> >>> SPLC logo >>> >>> >>> *FIGHTING HATE // TEACHING TOLERANCE // SEEKING JUSTICE >>> * >>> >>> MARCH 9, 2019 >>> >>> *Weekend Read // Issue 121* >>> >>> Peg, >>> >>> It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, >>> in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as >>> they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights >>> marchers so badly that the date became known the nation >>> over as Bloody Sunday. >>> >>> Fifty-four years have passed since that historic march >>> for voting rights, but as the speakers lamented last >>> weekend, we are still fighting for the right to vote today. >>> >>> However, as Rep. John Lewis told a crowd at the Civil >>> Rights Memorial Center in Montgomery as part of the >>> Bloody Sunday anniversary, ?We come with the spirit and >>> the belief that we can change things. We have the power. >>> We have the ability. We can do it.? >>> >>> Doing the hard work of achieving the ideals of the civil >>> rights movement is the message of white academic and >>> diversity trainer Robin DiAngelo?s recent book ?White >>> Fragility.? It has spent seven months near the top of >>> /The New York Times/?bestseller list despite a >>> challenging message to white people, its intended >>> audience: When ??not if ??you perpetuate racism, don?t >>> get defensive >>> . >>> >>> ?In my experience, day in and day out, most white people >>> are absolutely not receptive to finding out their impact >>> on other people,? DiAngelo told Nosheen Iqbal for /The >>> Guardian/. She recounted the way that ?They insist, >>> ?Well, it?s not me?, or say ?I?m doing my best, what do >>> you want from me??? >>> >>> One problem, DiAngelo says, is that white progressives >>> often define racism as something obvious and violent >>> ??like when police beat civil rights marchers in Selma >>> in 1965 ??when the reality is that it is much more >>> insidious. >>> >>> ?We have to stop thinking about racism simply as someone >>> who says the N-word,? she told Iqbal. ?This book is >>> centered in the white western colonial context, and in >>> that context white people hold institutional power.? >>> >>> But over the course of 20 years of doing trainings >>> around race and diversity, DiAngelo has discovered that >>> white progressives who say they want to be allies to >>> people of color are often nonetheless uncomfortable >>> examining the impact of their own behavior >>> . >>> >>> DiAngelo defines this as white fragility ? the inability >>> of white people to tolerate racial stress. >>> >>> ?I want to build the stamina to handle the discomfort so >>> we don?t retreat in the face of it, because retreating >>> holds the status quo in place, and the status quo is the >>> reproduction of racism,? DiAngelo explained. >>> >>> Without that stamina, white people who discover ways >>> they may have accidentally perpetuated racial inequality >>> and injustice too often ?weaponi[ze their] hurt >>> feelings? by getting indignant and defensive, in turn >>> creating a climate that makes their anxiety more >>> important than the concerns of the people of color >>> ?around >>> them. >>> >>> As DiAngelo asks, ?If nobody is racist, why is racism >>> still America?s biggest problem? What are white people >>> afraid they will lose by listening?? >>> >>> It can be difficult to know how to do that in the >>> moment. Our guide on how to respond to everyday bigotry >>> ?can >>> help. So can our guide on 10 ways to fight hate >>> , >>> one of which is to educate yourself through cross-racial >>> conversations, like the kind DiAngelo has been promoting >>> for decades. >>> >>> After all, within the white, western colonial context, >>> DiAngelo points out: ?Racism is a white problem. It was >>> constructed and created by white people and the ultimate >>> responsibility lies with white people. For too long >>> we?ve looked at it as if it were someone else?s problem.? >>> >>> On this anniversary of the march from Selma to >>> Montgomery, when voter suppression is still rampant >>> , >>> police abuses are still violent >>> , >>> and civil rights are far from guaranteed >>> , >>> it could not be more clear. >>> >>> The Editors >>> >>> P.S. Here are some other pieces we think are valuable >>> this week: >>> >>> * Immigration detention has life-changing consequences >>> for sisters >>> >>> by Liz Vinson for the /Southern Poverty Law Center/ >>> * How a black man says he ?outsmarted? a neo-Nazi >>> group and became their new leader >>> >>> by Katie Mettler for /The Washington Post/ >>> * Kneeling during the anthem at Ole Miss: ?I needed to >>> stand up for my rights? >>> >>> by Billy Witz for /The New York Times/ >>> * Dollars on the margins >>> >>> by Matthew Desmond for /The New York Times Magazine/ >>> >>> *Was this message forwarded to you? Sign up to receive >>> SPLC updates. >>> * >>> >>> Update Preferences >>> >>> | Unsubscribe >>> >>> | Privacy Policy >>> >>> | Contact Us >>> >>> | Copyright 2019 >>> >>> >>> Follow SPLC >>> >>> Facebook Icon >>> Twitter >>> Icon >>> Youtube >>> Icon >>> >>> >>> Southern Poverty Law Center >>> 400 Washington Avenue >>> Montgomery, AL 36104 >>> 334.956.8200 // splcenter.org >>> >>> >>> *From:*xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] *On Behalf Of >>> *Simangele Mayisela >>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 09, 2019 12:54 PM >>> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital >>> and Knowledge Brokering >>> >>> Dear Andy >>> >>> I browsed your ?ethical politics paper and found it to >>> be ?moving. I realise my view of social capital has >>> somehow been narrow as only focused on knowledge >>> transfer ? conscious or unconscious. Thanks for >>> providing the background of the concept. At a political >>> and economic level, it reminds me of the South African >>> ??Xolobeni? saga, where a rural community, located on >>> beautiful coastal ?landscape with indigenous flora in >>> the Eastern Cape is bulldozed by an Aissie mining >>> company who ?obtained? mining rights from the government >>> under the guise that this will bring development and >>> jobs to the community. ?You can find the images and the >>> news briefs on this social conundrum and the plight of >>> the Exolobeni people on google ?This is where the need >>> of social solidarity becomes paramount above the idea of >>> social capital. Thanks for sharing?will read this paper >>> in depth. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Simangele >>> >>> *From:*xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] *On Behalf Of >>> *Andy Blunden >>> *Sent:* 07 March 2019 04:00 PM >>> *To:* xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital >>> and Knowledge Brokering >>> >>> Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? >>> >>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf >>> >>> material for your brainstorming. >>> >>> andy >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> >>> On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: >>> >>> I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital >>> and the related idea of knowledge brokering but find >>> the free market/enterprise thinking problematic. >>> >>> Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the >>> time and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, >>> "I guess I will teach you since you help the community" >>> >>> I know that is over simplified but something been >>> bugging me about this for a long time, simply >>> haven't found a better alternative or formulated my >>> thinking. >>> >>> Playing with the idea of taking cognitive >>> apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive >>> apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge >>> development and diffusion that occurs between both >>> agents and networks. >>> >>> Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. >>> >>> This communication is intended for the addressee only. >>> It is confidential. If you have received this >>> communication in error, please notify us immediately and >>> destroy the original message. You may not copy or >>> disseminate this communication without the permission of >>> the University. Only authorised signatories are >>> competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the >>> University and recipients are thus advised that the >>> content of this message may not be legally binding on >>> the University and may contain the personal views and >>> opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the >>> views and opinions of The University of the >>> Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the >>> University and outsiders are subject to South African >>> Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. >>> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/eae16d5d/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 30603 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/eae16d5d/attachment.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 748 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/eae16d5d/attachment.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 826 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/eae16d5d/attachment-0001.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 876 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/eae16d5d/attachment-0002.jpg From hshonerd@gmail.com Sat Mar 9 17:58:23 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 18:58:23 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: <003701d4d6ab$6ac7d5e0$405781a0$@att.net> References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA801339574CD@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> <003701d4d6ab$6ac7d5e0$405781a0$@att.net> Message-ID: Peg, The story from your second link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2019/03/01/how-black-man-outsmarted-neo-nazi-group-became-their-new-leader/?utm_term=.41daea85e467&wpisrc=al_trending_now__alert-national&wpmk=1 It seemed like life being stranger than a bad screenplay, but no: The Black Klansman won the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay, which was based on real life. What to make of it? You can certainly see the appeal of a Monty Python take on history. Blessed are the cheese makers. Henry > On Mar 9, 2019, at 12:08 PM, Peg Griffin wrote: > > How difficult doing social solidarity is in spite of its necessity, right? Here?s an SPLC piece (with a book suggestion within it) that I think some folks probably already have and others might want. It?s called ?If nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest problem?? > Keeps on being hard to follow John Lewis into ?good trouble,? doesn?t it? > PG > It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights marchers so badly that the date became known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. > > > > FIGHTING HATE // TEACHING TOLERANCE // SEEKING JUSTICE > MARCH 9, 2019 > Weekend Read // Issue 121 > Peg, > > It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights marchers so badly that the date became known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. > > Fifty-four years have passed since that historic march for voting rights, but as the speakers lamented last weekend, we are still fighting for the right to vote today. > > However, as Rep. John Lewis told a crowd at the Civil Rights Memorial Center in Montgomery as part of the Bloody Sunday anniversary, ?We come with the spirit and the belief that we can change things. We have the power. We have the ability. We can do it.? > > Doing the hard work of achieving the ideals of the civil rights movement is the message of white academic and diversity trainer Robin DiAngelo?s recent book ?White Fragility.? It has spent seven months near the top of The New York Times bestseller list despite a challenging message to white people, its intended audience: When ? not if ? you perpetuate racism, don?t get defensive . > > ?In my experience, day in and day out, most white people are absolutely not receptive to finding out their impact on other people,? DiAngelo told Nosheen Iqbal for The Guardian. She recounted the way that ?They insist, ?Well, it?s not me?, or say ?I?m doing my best, what do you want from me??? > > One problem, DiAngelo says, is that white progressives often define racism as something obvious and violent ? like when police beat civil rights marchers in Selma in 1965 ? when the reality is that it is much more insidious. > > ?We have to stop thinking about racism simply as someone who says the N-word,? she told Iqbal. ?This book is centered in the white western colonial context, and in that context white people hold institutional power.? > > But over the course of 20 years of doing trainings around race and diversity, DiAngelo has discovered that white progressives who say they want to be allies to people of color are often nonetheless uncomfortable examining the impact of their own behavior . > > DiAngelo defines this as white fragility ? the inability of white people to tolerate racial stress. > > ?I want to build the stamina to handle the discomfort so we don?t retreat in the face of it, because retreating holds the status quo in place, and the status quo is the reproduction of racism,? DiAngelo explained. > > Without that stamina, white people who discover ways they may have accidentally perpetuated racial inequality and injustice too often ?weaponi[ze their] hurt feelings? by getting indignant and defensive, in turn creating a climate that makes their anxiety more important than the concerns of the people of color around them. > > As DiAngelo asks, ?If nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest problem? What are white people afraid they will lose by listening?? > > It can be difficult to know how to do that in the moment. Our guide on how to respond to everyday bigotry can help. So can our guide on 10 ways to fight hate , one of which is to educate yourself through cross-racial conversations, like the kind DiAngelo has been promoting for decades. > > After all, within the white, western colonial context, DiAngelo points out: ?Racism is a white problem. It was constructed and created by white people and the ultimate responsibility lies with white people. For too long we?ve looked at it as if it were someone else?s problem.? > > On this anniversary of the march from Selma to Montgomery, when voter suppression is still rampant , police abuses are still violent , and civil rights are far from guaranteed , it could not be more clear. > > The Editors > > P.S. Here are some other pieces we think are valuable this week: > > Immigration detention has life-changing consequences for sisters by Liz Vinson for the Southern Poverty Law Center > How a black man says he ?outsmarted? a neo-Nazi group and became their new leader by Katie Mettler for The Washington Post > Kneeling during the anthem at Ole Miss: ?I needed to stand up for my rights? by Billy Witz for The New York Times > Dollars on the margins by Matthew Desmond for The New York Times Magazine > Was this message forwarded to you? Sign up to receive SPLC updates. > Update Preferences | Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Copyright 2019 > > > > Follow SPLC > > Southern Poverty Law Center > 400 Washington Avenue > Montgomery, AL 36104 > 334.956.8200 // splcenter.org > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Simangele Mayisela > Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2019 12:54 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering > > <> > Dear Andy > > I browsed your ethical politics paper and found it to be moving. I realise my view of social capital has somehow been narrow as only focused on knowledge transfer ? conscious or unconscious. Thanks for providing the background of the concept. At a political and economic level, it reminds me of the South African ?Xolobeni? saga, where a rural community, located on beautiful coastal landscape with indigenous flora in the Eastern Cape is bulldozed by an Aissie mining company who ?obtained? mining rights from the government under the guise that this will bring development and jobs to the community. You can find the images and the news briefs on this social conundrum and the plight of the Exolobeni people on google This is where the need of social solidarity becomes paramount above the idea of social capital. Thanks for sharing?will read this paper in depth. > > Regards, > Simangele > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: 07 March 2019 04:00 PM > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering > > Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? > > https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf > material for your brainstorming. > > andy > > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: >> I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the related idea of knowledge brokering but find the free market/enterprise thinking problematic. >> >> Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I will teach you since you help the community" >> >> I know that is over simplified but something been bugging me about this for a long time, simply haven't found a better alternative or formulated my thinking. >> >> Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge development and diffusion that occurs between both agents and networks. >> >> Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. > This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/9173eba2/attachment-0001.html From annalisa@unm.edu Sat Mar 9 18:14:15 2019 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 02:14:15 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article Message-ID: Hi Xmcars, Is anyone out there who might be able to catch a copy of this article and send it to me? https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/evolutionarydevelopmental-modeling-of-neurodiversity-and-psychopathology/C5478B5189A10630A98378828A09EB40 Thanks so much. Kind regards, Annalisa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/798a4a02/attachment.html From hshonerd@gmail.com Sat Mar 9 18:40:10 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 19:40:10 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: <52d36ceb-4ae5-b9e7-2321-cd4a82e2e212@marxists.org> References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA801339574CD@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> <003701d4d6ab$6ac7d5e0$405781a0$@att.net> <52d36ceb-4ae5-b9e7-2321-cd4a82e2e212@marxists.org> Message-ID: <8993C76D-16BE-4287-983B-2336E2D08CB5@gmail.com> Andy, We have our own indigenous people. I know it fairly well here in New Mexico from my work in Indian Education (Navajo and Pueblos). Based on that ?indigenous problem" I think you are right that the issue is not as toxic as our the situation for Black people, but there is toxicity. And it has been around even longer than in Australia. Incidentally, have you every heard of two Australian bands?: Yothu Yindi (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7cbkxn4G8U ) or Midnight Oil (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2I9QNU_u_k? ) I saw them play in Albuquerque some 30 years ago. Amazing rock and roll, an expression of social solidarity. The blues, jazz, hip hop, raggae are all forms of social solidarity, and the musicians that express it, and bring it out in their audiences, have human capital. Just saying. Henry > On Mar 9, 2019, at 6:01 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > Yes. I haven't got to that chapter yet, but he has already made this clear. It also shows how the issue of poverty and the labour issue became transmuted into the issue of the emancipated slaves. This is what I meant by the "racialisation" of American politics, a problem which is still disabling progressive politics in the US. We have racism in Australia. No doubt about that. Anti-immigrant racism is, in my view, utterly ineffective in changing the political landscape overall, despite heaping misery on whoever the latest wave of immigrants happens to be. But after a few years, the colour of the next wave changes, a new generation grows up and we move on. The racism against the indigenous people remains and it is a terrible problem for us. But I don't think it poisons the entire political landscape like the legacy of slavery does in the US. > > Andy > > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 10/03/2019 11:50 am, Helena Worthen wrote: >> Andy and others: >> >> Thanks for reading DuBois. The chapter titled ?The White Worker? is living history, the clearest, strongest explanation available of the situation of racism in the US today. This is a chapter one can actually assign to students when they ask ?Why Trump?? >> >> Helena >> >>> On Mar 10, 2019, at 7:30 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >>> >>> At the moment I am reading W E B Du Bois on the history of the Reconstruction after the American Civil War. Horrific reading in terms of the brutality of the Southern whites' attitudes to the "freedmen" and the system of laws designed to keep them in bondage, but also startling how much of the terms of debate seem not to have changed over a period of 150 years. Du Bois is interesting because he shows how Lincoln never intended to end slavery, but the whole logic of the situation forced his hand, even though he was the first to see that. The depth of the legacy of slavery in the US becomes abundantly clear; every social issue gets racialised. How similar the issues are today as when Du Bois was writing! >>> >>> "Social capital" seemed to count for little, but "human capital" of course, took on a very specific meaning in those days. >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> On 10/03/2019 6:08 am, Peg Griffin wrote: >>>> How difficult doing social solidarity is in spite of its necessity, right? Here?s an SPLC piece (with a book suggestion within it) that I think some folks probably already have and others might want. It?s called ?If nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest problem?? >>>> Keeps on being hard to follow John Lewis into ?good trouble,? doesn?t it? >>>> PG >>>> It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights marchers so badly that the date became known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> FIGHTING HATE // TEACHING TOLERANCE // SEEKING JUSTICE >>>> MARCH 9, 2019 >>>> Weekend Read // Issue 121 >>>> Peg, >>>> >>>> It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights marchers so badly that the date became known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. >>>> >>>> Fifty-four years have passed since that historic march for voting rights, but as the speakers lamented last weekend, we are still fighting for the right to vote today. >>>> >>>> However, as Rep. John Lewis told a crowd at the Civil Rights Memorial Center in Montgomery as part of the Bloody Sunday anniversary, ?We come with the spirit and the belief that we can change things. We have the power. We have the ability. We can do it.? >>>> >>>> Doing the hard work of achieving the ideals of the civil rights movement is the message of white academic and diversity trainer Robin DiAngelo?s recent book ?White Fragility.? It has spent seven months near the top of The New York Times bestseller list despite a challenging message to white people, its intended audience: When ? not if ? you perpetuate racism, don?t get defensive . >>>> >>>> ?In my experience, day in and day out, most white people are absolutely not receptive to finding out their impact on other people,? DiAngelo told Nosheen Iqbal for The Guardian. She recounted the way that ?They insist, ?Well, it?s not me?, or say ?I?m doing my best, what do you want from me??? >>>> >>>> One problem, DiAngelo says, is that white progressives often define racism as something obvious and violent ? like when police beat civil rights marchers in Selma in 1965 ? when the reality is that it is much more insidious. >>>> >>>> ?We have to stop thinking about racism simply as someone who says the N-word,? she told Iqbal. ?This book is centered in the white western colonial context, and in that context white people hold institutional power.? >>>> >>>> But over the course of 20 years of doing trainings around race and diversity, DiAngelo has discovered that white progressives who say they want to be allies to people of color are often nonetheless uncomfortable examining the impact of their own behavior . >>>> >>>> DiAngelo defines this as white fragility ? the inability of white people to tolerate racial stress. >>>> >>>> ?I want to build the stamina to handle the discomfort so we don?t retreat in the face of it, because retreating holds the status quo in place, and the status quo is the reproduction of racism,? DiAngelo explained. >>>> >>>> Without that stamina, white people who discover ways they may have accidentally perpetuated racial inequality and injustice too often ?weaponi[ze their] hurt feelings? by getting indignant and defensive, in turn creating a climate that makes their anxiety more important than the concerns of the people of color around them. >>>> >>>> As DiAngelo asks, ?If nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest problem? What are white people afraid they will lose by listening?? >>>> >>>> It can be difficult to know how to do that in the moment. Our guide on how to respond to everyday bigotry can help. So can our guide on 10 ways to fight hate , one of which is to educate yourself through cross-racial conversations, like the kind DiAngelo has been promoting for decades. >>>> >>>> After all, within the white, western colonial context, DiAngelo points out: ?Racism is a white problem. It was constructed and created by white people and the ultimate responsibility lies with white people. For too long we?ve looked at it as if it were someone else?s problem.? >>>> >>>> On this anniversary of the march from Selma to Montgomery, when voter suppression is still rampant , police abuses are still violent , and civil rights are far from guaranteed , it could not be more clear. >>>> >>>> The Editors >>>> >>>> P.S. Here are some other pieces we think are valuable this week: >>>> >>>> Immigration detention has life-changing consequences for sisters by Liz Vinson for the Southern Poverty Law Center >>>> How a black man says he ?outsmarted? a neo-Nazi group and became their new leader by Katie Mettler for The Washington Post >>>> Kneeling during the anthem at Ole Miss: ?I needed to stand up for my rights? by Billy Witz for The New York Times >>>> Dollars on the margins by Matthew Desmond for The New York Times Magazine >>>> Was this message forwarded to you? Sign up to receive SPLC updates. >>>> Update Preferences | Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Copyright 2019 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Follow SPLC >>>> >>>> Southern Poverty Law Center >>>> 400 Washington Avenue >>>> Montgomery, AL 36104 >>>> 334.956.8200 // splcenter.org >>>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Simangele Mayisela >>>> Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2019 12:54 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering >>>> >>>> <> >>>> Dear Andy >>>> >>>> I browsed your ethical politics paper and found it to be moving. I realise my view of social capital has somehow been narrow as only focused on knowledge transfer ? conscious or unconscious. Thanks for providing the background of the concept. At a political and economic level, it reminds me of the South African ?Xolobeni? saga, where a rural community, located on beautiful coastal landscape with indigenous flora in the Eastern Cape is bulldozed by an Aissie mining company who ?obtained? mining rights from the government under the guise that this will bring development and jobs to the community. You can find the images and the news briefs on this social conundrum and the plight of the Exolobeni people on google This is where the need of social solidarity becomes paramount above the idea of social capital. Thanks for sharing?will read this paper in depth. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Simangele >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>>> Sent: 07 March 2019 04:00 PM >>>> To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering >>>> >>>> Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? >>>> >>>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf >>>> material for your brainstorming. >>>> >>>> andy >>>> >>>> Andy Blunden >>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>> On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: >>>> I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the related idea of knowledge brokering but find the free market/enterprise thinking problematic. >>>> >>>> Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I will teach you since you help the community" >>>> >>>> I know that is over simplified but something been bugging me about this for a long time, simply haven't found a better alternative or formulated my thinking. >>>> >>>> Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge development and diffusion that occurs between both agents and networks. >>>> >>>> Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. >>>> This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/35cbf36f/attachment.html From hworthen@illinois.edu Sat Mar 9 19:48:38 2019 From: hworthen@illinois.edu (Worthen, Helena Harlow) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 03:48:38 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky In-Reply-To: <1534176463415.1350@ils.uio.no> References: <1534121857228.33038@ils.uio.no> <1534154956936.24314@ils.uio.no> <1534176463415.1350@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: Does anyone on this list have knowledge of Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky, Ukranian educator ? younger than Vygotsky, author of works about children?s education, head teacher at country (regional?) school. Any connection with the Vygotsky-Luria line? Thanks - Helena Worthen From mcole@ucsd.edu Sat Mar 9 19:59:04 2019 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 19:59:04 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky In-Reply-To: References: <1534121857228.33038@ils.uio.no> <1534154956936.24314@ils.uio.no> <1534176463415.1350@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: Worked with blind-deaf, Helena? I am not sure, but will check Mike On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 7:53 PM Worthen, Helena Harlow wrote: > Does anyone on this list have knowledge of Vasyl Olexandrovych > Sukhomlynsky, Ukranian educator ? younger than Vygotsky, author of works > about children?s education, head teacher at country (regional?) school. > > Any connection with the Vygotsky-Luria line? > > Thanks - Helena Worthen > > -- Who says development is not a life long process has either not lived long enough, or has lived too long. Anon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190309/c8522372/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Sat Mar 9 20:11:06 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 15:11:06 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: <8993C76D-16BE-4287-983B-2336E2D08CB5@gmail.com> References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA801339574CD@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> <003701d4d6ab$6ac7d5e0$405781a0$@att.net> <52d36ceb-4ae5-b9e7-2321-cd4a82e2e212@marxists.org> <8993C76D-16BE-4287-983B-2336E2D08CB5@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5964a6ca-afd5-e45b-e34c-676aa5453320@marxists.org> Yothu Yindi is fantastic. Makes your hair stand on end to even listen! Midnight Oil is not my generation; I'm more a Joan Baez guy. No doubt they did great work bringing social issues to the youth. Unfortunately in 2007 the Labor Party recruited their lead singer, Peter Garrett, as an ALP candidate in the election which put an end to John Howard's reign in 2007. He was then given a task for which he was not equipped, and though he didn't do a bad job, he was successfully torn to bits by Tony Abbott's attack dogs. Along with a few other good souls who had been recruited for that election, he dropped out of politics in 2013, after the experience of being the target of a sustained barrage of right-wing vitriol. Thank goodness Gurrumul Yinopingu was not drawn into politics - something that is utterly unthhinkable, the guy was a saint - but regrettably Gurumul died in 2013. Is there such a thing as musical capital? If so, the ALP spent their allocation. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 10/03/2019 1:40 pm, HENRY SHONERD wrote: > Andy, > We have our own indigenous people. I know it fairly well > here in New Mexico from my work in Indian Education > (Navajo and Pueblos). Based on that ?indigenous problem" I > think you are right that the issue is not as toxic as our > the situation for Black people, but there is toxicity. And > it has been around even longer than in Australia. > Incidentally, have you every heard of two Australian > bands?: Yothu Yindi > (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7cbkxn4G8U > ) or Midnight > Oil (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2I9QNU_u_k? > ) I saw them > play in Albuquerque some 30 years ago. Amazing rock and > roll, an expression of social solidarity. The blues, jazz, > hip hop, raggae are all forms of social solidarity, and > the musicians that express it, and bring it out in their > audiences, have human capital. Just saying. > Henry > > > > >> On Mar 9, 2019, at 6:01 PM, Andy Blunden >> > wrote: >> >> Yes. I haven't got to that chapter yet, but he has >> already made this clear. It also shows how the issue of >> poverty and the labour issue became transmuted into the >> issue of the emancipated slaves. This is what I meant by >> the "racialisation" of American politics, a problem which >> is still disabling progressive politics in the US. We >> have racism in Australia. No doubt about that. >> Anti-immigrant racism is, in my view, utterly ineffective >> in changing the political landscape overall, despite >> heaping misery on whoever the latest wave of immigrants >> happens to be. But after a few years, the colour of the >> next wave changes, a new generation grows up and we move >> on. The racism against the indigenous people remains and >> it is a terrible problem for us. But I don't think it >> poisons the entire political landscape like the legacy of >> slavery does in the US. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 10/03/2019 11:50 am, Helena Worthen wrote: >>> Andy and others: >>> >>> Thanks for reading DuBois. The chapter titled ?The White >>> Worker? is living history, the clearest, strongest >>> explanation available of the situation of racism in the >>> US today. This is a chapter one can actually assign to >>> students when they ask ?Why Trump?? >>> >>> Helena >>> >>>> On Mar 10, 2019, at 7:30 AM, Andy Blunden >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> At the moment I am reading W E B Du Bois on the history >>>> of the Reconstruction after the American Civil War. >>>> Horrific reading in terms of the brutality of the >>>> Southern whites' attitudes to the "freedmen" and the >>>> system of laws designed to keep them in bondage, but >>>> also startling how much of the terms of debate seem not >>>> to have changed over a period of 150 years. Du Bois is >>>> interesting because he shows how Lincoln never intended >>>> to end slavery, but the whole logic of the situation >>>> forced his hand, even though he was the first to see >>>> that. The depth of the legacy of slavery in the US >>>> becomes abundantly clear; every social issue gets >>>> racialised. How similar the issues are today as when Du >>>> Bois was writing! >>>> >>>> "Social capital" seemed to count for little, but "human >>>> capital" of course, took on a very specific meaning in >>>> those days. >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> Andy Blunden >>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>> On 10/03/2019 6:08 am, Peg Griffin wrote: >>>>> How difficult doing social solidarity is in spite of >>>>> its necessity, right?? Here?s an SPLC piece (with a >>>>> book suggestion within it) that I think some folks >>>>> probably already have and others might want. It?s >>>>> called?If nobody is racist, why is racism still >>>>> America?s biggest problem?? >>>>> Keeps on being hard to follow John Lewis into ?good >>>>> trouble,? doesn?t it? >>>>> PG >>>>> >>>>> It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, >>>>> Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last >>>>> weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat >>>>> civil rights marchers so badly that the date became >>>>> known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *FIGHTING HATE // TEACHING TOLERANCE // SEEKING >>>>> JUSTICE >>>>> * >>>>> MARCH 9, 2019 >>>>> >>>>> *Weekend Read // Issue 121* >>>>> >>>>> Peg, >>>>> >>>>> It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, >>>>> Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last >>>>> weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat >>>>> civil rights marchers so badly that the date became >>>>> known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. >>>>> >>>>> Fifty-four years have passed since that historic march >>>>> for voting rights, but as the speakers lamented last >>>>> weekend, we are still fighting for the right to vote >>>>> today. >>>>> >>>>> However, as Rep. John Lewis told a crowd at the Civil >>>>> Rights Memorial Center in Montgomery as part of the >>>>> Bloody Sunday anniversary, ?We come with the spirit >>>>> and the belief that we can change things. We have the >>>>> power. We have the ability. We can do it.? >>>>> >>>>> Doing the hard work of achieving the ideals of the >>>>> civil rights movement is the message of white academic >>>>> and diversity trainer Robin DiAngelo?s recent book >>>>> ?White Fragility.? It has spent seven months near the >>>>> top of /The New York Times/?bestseller list despite a >>>>> challenging message to white people, its intended >>>>> audience: When ??not if ??you perpetuate racism, don?t >>>>> get defensive >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> ?In my experience, day in and day out, most white >>>>> people are absolutely not receptive to finding out >>>>> their impact on other people,? DiAngelo told Nosheen >>>>> Iqbal for /The Guardian/. She recounted the way that >>>>> ?They insist, ?Well, it?s not me?, or say ?I?m doing >>>>> my best, what do you want from me??? >>>>> >>>>> One problem, DiAngelo says, is that white progressives >>>>> often define racism as something obvious and violent >>>>> ??like when police beat civil rights marchers in Selma >>>>> in 1965 ??when the reality is that it is much more >>>>> insidious. >>>>> >>>>> ?We have to stop thinking about racism simply as >>>>> someone who says the N-word,? she told Iqbal. ?This >>>>> book is centered in the white western colonial >>>>> context, and in that context white people hold >>>>> institutional power.? >>>>> >>>>> But over the course of 20 years of doing trainings >>>>> around race and diversity, DiAngelo has discovered >>>>> that white progressives who say they want to be allies >>>>> to people of color are often nonetheless uncomfortable >>>>> examining the impact of their own behavior >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> DiAngelo defines this as white fragility ? the >>>>> inability of white people to tolerate racial stress. >>>>> >>>>> ?I want to build the stamina to handle the discomfort >>>>> so we don?t retreat in the face of it, because >>>>> retreating holds the status quo in place, and the >>>>> status quo is the reproduction of racism,? DiAngelo >>>>> explained. >>>>> >>>>> Without that stamina, white people who discover ways >>>>> they may have accidentally perpetuated racial >>>>> inequality and injustice too often ?weaponi[ze their] >>>>> hurt feelings? by getting indignant and defensive, in >>>>> turn creating a climate that makes their anxiety more >>>>> important than the concerns of the people of color >>>>> ?around >>>>> them. >>>>> >>>>> As DiAngelo asks, ?If nobody is racist, why is racism >>>>> still America?s biggest problem? What are white people >>>>> afraid they will lose by listening?? >>>>> >>>>> It can be difficult to know how to do that in the >>>>> moment. Our guide on how to respond to everyday >>>>> bigotry >>>>> ?can >>>>> help. So can our guide on 10 ways to fight hate >>>>> , >>>>> one of which is to educate yourself through >>>>> cross-racial conversations, like the kind DiAngelo has >>>>> been promoting for decades. >>>>> >>>>> After all, within the white, western colonial context, >>>>> DiAngelo points out: ?Racism is a white problem. It >>>>> was constructed and created by white people and the >>>>> ultimate responsibility lies with white people. For >>>>> too long we?ve looked at it as if it were someone >>>>> else?s problem.? >>>>> >>>>> On this anniversary of the march from Selma to >>>>> Montgomery, when voter suppression is still rampant >>>>> , >>>>> police abuses are still violent >>>>> , >>>>> and civil rights are far from guaranteed >>>>> , >>>>> it could not be more clear. >>>>> >>>>> The Editors >>>>> >>>>> P.S. Here are some other pieces we think are valuable >>>>> this week: >>>>> >>>>> * Immigration detention has life-changing >>>>> consequences for sisters >>>>> by >>>>> Liz Vinson for the/Southern Poverty Law Center/ >>>>> * How a black man says he ?outsmarted? a neo-Nazi >>>>> group and became their new leader >>>>> by >>>>> Katie Mettler for/The Washington Post/ >>>>> * Kneeling during the anthem at Ole Miss: ?I needed >>>>> to stand up for my rights? >>>>> by >>>>> Billy Witz for/The New York Times/ >>>>> * Dollars on the margins >>>>> by >>>>> Matthew Desmond for/The New York Times Magazine/ >>>>> >>>>> *Was this message forwarded to you?Sign up to receive >>>>> SPLC updates. >>>>> * >>>>> >>>>> Update Preferences >>>>> |Unsubscribe >>>>> |Privacy >>>>> Policy >>>>> |Contact >>>>> Us >>>>> | >>>>> Copyright 2019 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Follow SPLC >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Southern Poverty Law Center >>>>> 400 Washington Avenue >>>>> Montgomery, AL 36104 >>>>> 334.956.8200 //splcenter.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:*xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu[mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu]*On >>>>> Behalf Of*Simangele Mayisela >>>>> *Sent:*Saturday, March 09, 2019 12:54 PM >>>>> *To:*eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> *Subject:*[Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital >>>>> and Knowledge Brokering >>>>> Dear Andy >>>>> >>>>> I browsed your ?ethical politics paper and found it to >>>>> be ?moving. I realise my view of social capital has >>>>> somehow been narrow as only focused on knowledge >>>>> transfer ? conscious or unconscious. Thanks for >>>>> providing the background of the concept. At a >>>>> political and economic level, it reminds me of the >>>>> South African ??Xolobeni? saga, where a rural >>>>> community, located on beautiful coastal ?landscape >>>>> with indigenous flora in the Eastern Cape is bulldozed >>>>> by an Aissie mining company who ?obtained? mining >>>>> rights from the government under the guise that this >>>>> will bring development and jobs to the community. ?You >>>>> can find the images and the news briefs on this social >>>>> conundrum and the plight of the Exolobeni people on >>>>> google ?This is where the need of social solidarity >>>>> becomes paramount above the idea of social capital. >>>>> Thanks for sharing?will read this paper in depth. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Simangele >>>>> >>>>> *From:*xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu[mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu]*On >>>>> Behalf Of*Andy Blunden >>>>> *Sent:*07 March 2019 04:00 PM >>>>> *To:*xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> *Subject:*[Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital >>>>> and Knowledge Brokering >>>>> >>>>> Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? >>>>> >>>>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf >>>>> >>>>> material for your brainstorming. >>>>> >>>>> andy >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>>> On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital >>>>> and the related idea of knowledge brokering but >>>>> find the free market/enterprise thinking problematic. >>>>> >>>>> Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the >>>>> time and learning gets defined sorta as a >>>>> nuisance, "I guess I will teach you since you help >>>>> the community" >>>>> >>>>> I know that is over simplified but something been >>>>> bugging me about this for a long time, simply >>>>> haven't found a better alternative or formulated >>>>> my thinking. >>>>> >>>>> Playing with the idea of taking cognitive >>>>> apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive >>>>> apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional >>>>> knowledge development and diffusion that occurs >>>>> between both agents and networks. >>>>> >>>>> Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. >>>>> >>>>> This communication is intended for the addressee only. >>>>> It is confidential. If you have received this >>>>> communication in error, please notify us immediately >>>>> and destroy the original message. You may not copy or >>>>> disseminate this communication without the permission >>>>> of the University. Only authorised signatories are >>>>> competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the >>>>> University and recipients are thus advised that the >>>>> content of this message may not be legally binding on >>>>> the University and may contain the personal views and >>>>> opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the >>>>> views and opinions of The University of the >>>>> Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between >>>>> the University and outsiders are subject to South >>>>> African Law unless the University agrees in writing to >>>>> the contrary. >>> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/3379bcde/attachment.html From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Sat Mar 9 23:04:30 2019 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (Haydi Zulfei) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 07:04:30 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky In-Reply-To: References: <1534121857228.33038@ils.uio.no> <1534154956936.24314@ils.uio.no> <1534176463415.1350@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: <1436593822.3589756.1552201470342@mail.yahoo.com> On Sunday, March 10, 2019, 7:22:29 AM GMT+3:30, Worthen, Helena Harlow wrote: Does anyone on this list have knowledge of Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky, Ukranian educator ? younger than Vygotsky, author of works about children?s education, head teacher at country (regional?) school.? Any connection with the Vygotsky-Luria line? Thanks - Helena Worthen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/ec9d6204/attachment-0002.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/ec9d6204/attachment-0003.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Sukhomlinsky, Vasily Alexandrovich - Wikipedia.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 475558 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/ec9d6204/attachment-0001.pdf From a.j.gil@ils.uio.no Sat Mar 9 23:06:51 2019 From: a.j.gil@ils.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 07:06:51 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1552201611887.52566@ils.uio.no> Hi Annalisa, this is a very short piece, a commentary of another article. I could only access HTML, and exporting to PDF did not work that well, so I also pasted the text into Word.? Alfredo ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: 10 March 2019 03:14 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article Hi Xmcars, Is anyone out there who might be able to catch a copy of this article and send it to me? https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/evolutionarydevelopmental-modeling-of-neurodiversity-and-psychopathology/C5478B5189A10630A98378828A09EB40 Thanks so much. Kind regards, Annalisa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/94407e15/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Evolutionary-developmental modeling of neurodiversity and psychopathology.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 173656 bytes Desc: Evolutionary-developmental modeling of neurodiversity and psychopathology.pdf Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/94407e15/attachment.pdf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Evolutionary_.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 153455 bytes Desc: Evolutionary_.docx Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/94407e15/attachment.bin From a.j.gil@ils.uio.no Sat Mar 9 23:06:51 2019 From: a.j.gil@ils.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 07:06:51 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1552201611887.52566@ils.uio.no> Hi Annalisa, this is a very short piece, a commentary of another article. I could only access HTML, and exporting to PDF did not work that well, so I also pasted the text into Word.? Alfredo ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: 10 March 2019 03:14 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article Hi Xmcars, Is anyone out there who might be able to catch a copy of this article and send it to me? https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/evolutionarydevelopmental-modeling-of-neurodiversity-and-psychopathology/C5478B5189A10630A98378828A09EB40 Thanks so much. Kind regards, Annalisa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/94407e15/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Evolutionary-developmental modeling of neurodiversity and psychopathology.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 173656 bytes Desc: Evolutionary-developmental modeling of neurodiversity and psychopathology.pdf Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/94407e15/attachment-0001.pdf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Evolutionary_.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 153455 bytes Desc: Evolutionary_.docx Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/94407e15/attachment-0001.bin From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Sat Mar 9 23:29:34 2019 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (Haydi Zulfei) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 07:29:34 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky In-Reply-To: References: <1534121857228.33038@ils.uio.no> <1534154956936.24314@ils.uio.no> <1534176463415.1350@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: <2114315647.3588790.1552202974933@mail.yahoo.com> On Sunday, March 10, 2019, 7:22:29 AM GMT+3:30, Worthen, Helena Harlow wrote: Does anyone on this list have knowledge of Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky, Ukranian educator ? younger than Vygotsky, author of works about children?s education, head teacher at country (regional?) school.? Any connection with the Vygotsky-Luria line? Thanks - Helena Worthen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/de7d97ff/attachment-0002.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: I GIVE MY HEART TO CHILDREN.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 1275361 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/de7d97ff/attachment-0001.bin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/de7d97ff/attachment-0003.html From annalisa@unm.edu Sun Mar 10 03:45:08 2019 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 10:45:08 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article In-Reply-To: <1552201611887.52566@ils.uio.no> References: , <1552201611887.52566@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: Hello Alfredo and Haydi, Thank you for your teamwork to bring the fish to shore! I have been as of late considering disability and pathology and how these are digested in different ways specifically how they are discussed and parsed. How are they different or the same? What determines a pathology? or a disability? And so....an essay emerges... When considering mind, in Vedanta it is said that there is a subtle body of which the mind is included, and that this subtle body is on a never-ending incarnation from gross body (an incarnation) to gross body (another incarnation across space and time) propelled by past karmas that are impossible to evaluate and determine if only because they are so numerous as a collection associated with one individual being. (This chain is broken when the mind in its ignorance is released through knowledge of itself, very similar to John 8:32, "the truth shall set you free," as well as Socrates's "know thyself." ) In addition, the closest we can come to evaluating karmas is to say they are one of four kinds: there are karmas that have a known cause/known result; unknown cause/unknown result; unknown cause/known result; known cause/unknown result. So any karma constituted by an unknown cause or result is why a system of karma can at most be a belief and cannot determined through empiricism. Especially since there is no way to travel across lifetimes through births and deaths and collect data that way. If only! But even within a lifetime, unknown is unknown, until it becomes known. It's not the same with known becoming unknown, in that case it is just forgotten or lost. Such is the nature of knowledge (meaning knowledge might just not be in our heads or in books, but many other places besides...distributed cognition anyone?). To continue, within this cosmology, it is understood that this subtle body enters into a gross body and the individual leads its life based upon those predetermined karmas that travel in the pocket of the subtle body. They fructify much in the way the arrow leaves the bow. However that analogy is too simplistic as it does not consider free will. To explain that: the more intelligent the individual, the more choices are possible during the lifetime to express free will, however that lifetime's karmas create the map of that individual's lifetime, as it were; while choice expresses itself as where does the individual travel across this map, how does it direct itself within this map? In a way, the collection of karmas function like DNA and how its genetic expression manifests in an individual body. But the body itself is inert material; what causes the sentience is its subtle body, and that is why we can notice that when a being dies, there is something that has left it, no longer present, yet the body remains in its inert state, which then decomposes back to basic elements. The subtle body has gone on to its next lifetime to incarnate again. In a sense, the nature of the gross body (determined by karmas) in its relationship to its subtle body functions much like prism, where light (in this analogy represents the subtle body) penetrates the prism (the gross body) and the light that emerges *appears to emerge* from the prism itself, when the prism is actually functioning more like a filter breaking down the light spectrum. In this way, consciousness is not determined by the gross body *as its cause*, consciousness is everywhere and it shines and reflects everywhere, but the manner in which it shines, the *how* it shines, manifests in infinitely multifarious forms, and thus, similarly, intelligence also manifests in infinitely multifarious forms. Consciousness is not what you think! :) I was thinking about this metaphorically by considering the way a body of water will reflect light. We cannot look to the water to find the source of the light, nor determine what is it about water that causes it to be reflective. And yet we simply accept that water has this property. It just is. If we were to take a Cartesian approach and atomize water to its smallest part, we still could not find the source of light that appears to emerge from it (that is to say, if we could not perceive a sun, let's say). Neither could we identify why water has reflective properties by reducing it to its parts, though we might measure how reflective water is, which in turn we might discover and determine that the purer the water the more reflection it possesses the easier for light to penetrate it; the more impurities, the less it reflects and penetrates. It is not the nature of water to be non-reflective, but instead that there are other elements in it that obstruct or alter its reflectivity. By mistake, we might super-impose what are the properties of those other impurities upon the water's properties. And we might even mutually super-impose the properties of the water upon the properties of other obstructing or altering elements present, at the same time. What a knotty piece of yarn! (Or hall of mirrors!) In this way, since we can perceive a sun after all, panning out from the above analogy, we do *know* there is something beyond the water that is the source of light that may or may not be reflective of it (due to what other elements are present in the water). Of course, light does not generate from the water, even though it appears to come from it. That is an illusion. So I'd offer that consciousness, that we tend to believe is sourced in the mind, is actually just a reflection from "outside" the mind. The most we can do, when studying mind, is to measure different kinds of reflectivity, based upon the nature of body reflecting it. Yet, we can never determine the source of consciousness by taking apart a body, or analysis of its constituents, behaviors, etc. We can only compare and contrast reflectivity, which in terms of the mind, could be called intelligence and aptitude, and so on, as functions, not causes. Does that seem coherent? or is there something objectionable here? What is nice about this, is that pathology and disability need not be damning from this model, but instead an expression of a ratio of reflectivity to obstructions, which also includes how well an individual's interactions develop with its environment (i.e., language, culture, society, and tools). That it is possible to discover and learn about various ways to exercise and facilitate what brings out the best of itself, in the sense of the ancient Greek concept of excellence, within an individual, in terms of itself, and certainly not to be forced into comparison with other individuals and their reflectivities / intelligences, aptitudes, deficiencies, and so on, with the (albeit unconscious) goal to pathologize, relegate, dominate, or subordinate. Ok? Kind regards, Annalisa ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2019 12:06:51 AM To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article Hi Annalisa, this is a very short piece, a commentary of another article. I could only access HTML, and exporting to PDF did not work that well, so I also pasted the text into Word.? Alfredo ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: 10 March 2019 03:14 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article Hi Xmcars, Is anyone out there who might be able to catch a copy of this article and send it to me? https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/evolutionarydevelopmental-modeling-of-neurodiversity-and-psychopathology/C5478B5189A10630A98378828A09EB40 Thanks so much. Kind regards, Annalisa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/5b2356fd/attachment.html From annalisa@unm.edu Sun Mar 10 03:45:08 2019 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 10:45:08 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article In-Reply-To: <1552201611887.52566@ils.uio.no> References: , <1552201611887.52566@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: Hello Alfredo and Haydi, Thank you for your teamwork to bring the fish to shore! I have been as of late considering disability and pathology and how these are digested in different ways specifically how they are discussed and parsed. How are they different or the same? What determines a pathology? or a disability? And so....an essay emerges... When considering mind, in Vedanta it is said that there is a subtle body of which the mind is included, and that this subtle body is on a never-ending incarnation from gross body (an incarnation) to gross body (another incarnation across space and time) propelled by past karmas that are impossible to evaluate and determine if only because they are so numerous as a collection associated with one individual being. (This chain is broken when the mind in its ignorance is released through knowledge of itself, very similar to John 8:32, "the truth shall set you free," as well as Socrates's "know thyself." ) In addition, the closest we can come to evaluating karmas is to say they are one of four kinds: there are karmas that have a known cause/known result; unknown cause/unknown result; unknown cause/known result; known cause/unknown result. So any karma constituted by an unknown cause or result is why a system of karma can at most be a belief and cannot determined through empiricism. Especially since there is no way to travel across lifetimes through births and deaths and collect data that way. If only! But even within a lifetime, unknown is unknown, until it becomes known. It's not the same with known becoming unknown, in that case it is just forgotten or lost. Such is the nature of knowledge (meaning knowledge might just not be in our heads or in books, but many other places besides...distributed cognition anyone?). To continue, within this cosmology, it is understood that this subtle body enters into a gross body and the individual leads its life based upon those predetermined karmas that travel in the pocket of the subtle body. They fructify much in the way the arrow leaves the bow. However that analogy is too simplistic as it does not consider free will. To explain that: the more intelligent the individual, the more choices are possible during the lifetime to express free will, however that lifetime's karmas create the map of that individual's lifetime, as it were; while choice expresses itself as where does the individual travel across this map, how does it direct itself within this map? In a way, the collection of karmas function like DNA and how its genetic expression manifests in an individual body. But the body itself is inert material; what causes the sentience is its subtle body, and that is why we can notice that when a being dies, there is something that has left it, no longer present, yet the body remains in its inert state, which then decomposes back to basic elements. The subtle body has gone on to its next lifetime to incarnate again. In a sense, the nature of the gross body (determined by karmas) in its relationship to its subtle body functions much like prism, where light (in this analogy represents the subtle body) penetrates the prism (the gross body) and the light that emerges *appears to emerge* from the prism itself, when the prism is actually functioning more like a filter breaking down the light spectrum. In this way, consciousness is not determined by the gross body *as its cause*, consciousness is everywhere and it shines and reflects everywhere, but the manner in which it shines, the *how* it shines, manifests in infinitely multifarious forms, and thus, similarly, intelligence also manifests in infinitely multifarious forms. Consciousness is not what you think! :) I was thinking about this metaphorically by considering the way a body of water will reflect light. We cannot look to the water to find the source of the light, nor determine what is it about water that causes it to be reflective. And yet we simply accept that water has this property. It just is. If we were to take a Cartesian approach and atomize water to its smallest part, we still could not find the source of light that appears to emerge from it (that is to say, if we could not perceive a sun, let's say). Neither could we identify why water has reflective properties by reducing it to its parts, though we might measure how reflective water is, which in turn we might discover and determine that the purer the water the more reflection it possesses the easier for light to penetrate it; the more impurities, the less it reflects and penetrates. It is not the nature of water to be non-reflective, but instead that there are other elements in it that obstruct or alter its reflectivity. By mistake, we might super-impose what are the properties of those other impurities upon the water's properties. And we might even mutually super-impose the properties of the water upon the properties of other obstructing or altering elements present, at the same time. What a knotty piece of yarn! (Or hall of mirrors!) In this way, since we can perceive a sun after all, panning out from the above analogy, we do *know* there is something beyond the water that is the source of light that may or may not be reflective of it (due to what other elements are present in the water). Of course, light does not generate from the water, even though it appears to come from it. That is an illusion. So I'd offer that consciousness, that we tend to believe is sourced in the mind, is actually just a reflection from "outside" the mind. The most we can do, when studying mind, is to measure different kinds of reflectivity, based upon the nature of body reflecting it. Yet, we can never determine the source of consciousness by taking apart a body, or analysis of its constituents, behaviors, etc. We can only compare and contrast reflectivity, which in terms of the mind, could be called intelligence and aptitude, and so on, as functions, not causes. Does that seem coherent? or is there something objectionable here? What is nice about this, is that pathology and disability need not be damning from this model, but instead an expression of a ratio of reflectivity to obstructions, which also includes how well an individual's interactions develop with its environment (i.e., language, culture, society, and tools). That it is possible to discover and learn about various ways to exercise and facilitate what brings out the best of itself, in the sense of the ancient Greek concept of excellence, within an individual, in terms of itself, and certainly not to be forced into comparison with other individuals and their reflectivities / intelligences, aptitudes, deficiencies, and so on, with the (albeit unconscious) goal to pathologize, relegate, dominate, or subordinate. Ok? Kind regards, Annalisa ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2019 12:06:51 AM To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article Hi Annalisa, this is a very short piece, a commentary of another article. I could only access HTML, and exporting to PDF did not work that well, so I also pasted the text into Word.? Alfredo ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: 10 March 2019 03:14 To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] [xmca-l] Looking for a copy of this article Hi Xmcars, Is anyone out there who might be able to catch a copy of this article and send it to me? https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/evolutionarydevelopmental-modeling-of-neurodiversity-and-psychopathology/C5478B5189A10630A98378828A09EB40 Thanks so much. Kind regards, Annalisa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/5b2356fd/attachment-0001.html From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Sun Mar 10 05:39:50 2019 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (Haydi Zulfei) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:39:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky In-Reply-To: References: <1534121857228.33038@ils.uio.no> <1534154956936.24314@ils.uio.no> <1534176463415.1350@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: <669390779.3749406.1552221591224@mail.yahoo.com> On Sunday, March 10, 2019, 7:22:29 AM GMT+3:30, Worthen, Helena Harlow wrote: Does anyone on this list have knowledge of Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky, Ukranian educator ? younger than Vygotsky, author of works about children?s education, head teacher at country (regional?) school.? Any connection with the Vygotsky-Luria line? Thanks - Helena Worthen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/38352f90/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: The use of fairy tale potential in the pedagogy of V. A. Sukhomlinsky.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 19067 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/38352f90/attachment.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Using the potential of fairy ta - Unknown.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 531208 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/38352f90/attachment.pdf From hshonerd@gmail.com Sun Mar 10 07:54:57 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 08:54:57 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering In-Reply-To: <5964a6ca-afd5-e45b-e34c-676aa5453320@marxists.org> References: <539ebfd2-fb36-5b55-d2d6-5042461e028a@marxists.org> <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA801339574CD@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> <003701d4d6ab$6ac7d5e0$405781a0$@att.net> <52d36ceb-4ae5-b9e7-2321-cd4a82e2e212@marxists.org> <8993C76D-16BE-4287-983B-2336E2D08CB5@gmail.com> <5964a6ca-afd5-e45b-e34c-676aa5453320@marxists.org> Message-ID: Andy Anymore, I wonder how it is possible for anything to be before the generation of you and me;) Midnight Oil was the backup band for Yothu Yindi when I saw them. So sorry to hear Gurumul died. Musical capital, oh yeah! Add to that dance, any performance art. These are gestural systems across the sensory spectrum that speak to something foundational to any and all social projects. Something that speaks to and from all earthly creatures. All of it comes from the same stock. Sensing this makes the hair stand on end, as you say it. I continue to think that keeping in mind creative projects as the unit of all social movements is what will get us through, if anything can. A shout out to Vera! Henry > On Mar 9, 2019, at 9:11 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > Yothu Yindi is fantastic. Makes your hair stand on end to even listen! > > Midnight Oil is not my generation; I'm more a Joan Baez guy. No doubt they did great work bringing social issues to the youth. Unfortunately in 2007 the Labor Party recruited their lead singer, Peter Garrett, as an ALP candidate in the election which put an end to John Howard's reign in 2007. He was then given a task for which he was not equipped, and though he didn't do a bad job, he was successfully torn to bits by Tony Abbott's attack dogs. Along with a few other good souls who had been recruited for that election, he dropped out of politics in 2013, after the experience of being the target of a sustained barrage of right-wing vitriol. Thank goodness Gurrumul Yinopingu was not drawn into politics - something that is utterly unthhinkable, the guy was a saint - but regrettably Gurumul died in 2013. > > Is there such a thing as musical capital? If so, the ALP spent their allocation. > > Andy > > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 10/03/2019 1:40 pm, HENRY SHONERD wrote: >> Andy, >> We have our own indigenous people. I know it fairly well here in New Mexico from my work in Indian Education (Navajo and Pueblos). Based on that ?indigenous problem" I think you are right that the issue is not as toxic as our the situation for Black people, but there is toxicity. And it has been around even longer than in Australia. Incidentally, have you every heard of two Australian bands?: Yothu Yindi (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7cbkxn4G8U ) or Midnight Oil (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2I9QNU_u_k? ) I saw them play in Albuquerque some 30 years ago. Amazing rock and roll, an expression of social solidarity. The blues, jazz, hip hop, raggae are all forms of social solidarity, and the musicians that express it, and bring it out in their audiences, have human capital. Just saying. >> Henry >> >> >> >> >>> On Mar 9, 2019, at 6:01 PM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >>> >>> Yes. I haven't got to that chapter yet, but he has already made this clear. It also shows how the issue of poverty and the labour issue became transmuted into the issue of the emancipated slaves. This is what I meant by the "racialisation" of American politics, a problem which is still disabling progressive politics in the US. We have racism in Australia. No doubt about that. Anti-immigrant racism is, in my view, utterly ineffective in changing the political landscape overall, despite heaping misery on whoever the latest wave of immigrants happens to be. But after a few years, the colour of the next wave changes, a new generation grows up and we move on. The racism against the indigenous people remains and it is a terrible problem for us. But I don't think it poisons the entire political landscape like the legacy of slavery does in the US. >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> On 10/03/2019 11:50 am, Helena Worthen wrote: >>>> Andy and others: >>>> >>>> Thanks for reading DuBois. The chapter titled ?The White Worker? is living history, the clearest, strongest explanation available of the situation of racism in the US today. This is a chapter one can actually assign to students when they ask ?Why Trump?? >>>> >>>> Helena >>>> >>>>> On Mar 10, 2019, at 7:30 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> At the moment I am reading W E B Du Bois on the history of the Reconstruction after the American Civil War. Horrific reading in terms of the brutality of the Southern whites' attitudes to the "freedmen" and the system of laws designed to keep them in bondage, but also startling how much of the terms of debate seem not to have changed over a period of 150 years. Du Bois is interesting because he shows how Lincoln never intended to end slavery, but the whole logic of the situation forced his hand, even though he was the first to see that. The depth of the legacy of slavery in the US becomes abundantly clear; every social issue gets racialised. How similar the issues are today as when Du Bois was writing! >>>>> >>>>> "Social capital" seemed to count for little, but "human capital" of course, took on a very specific meaning in those days. >>>>> >>>>> Andy >>>>> >>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>>> On 10/03/2019 6:08 am, Peg Griffin wrote: >>>>>> How difficult doing social solidarity is in spite of its necessity, right? Here?s an SPLC piece (with a book suggestion within it) that I think some folks probably already have and others might want. It?s called ?If nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest problem?? >>>>>> Keeps on being hard to follow John Lewis into ?good trouble,? doesn?t it? >>>>>> PG >>>>>> It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights marchers so badly that the date became known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> FIGHTING HATE // TEACHING TOLERANCE // SEEKING JUSTICE >>>>>> MARCH 9, 2019 >>>>>> Weekend Read // Issue 121 >>>>>> Peg, >>>>>> >>>>>> It rained on marchers from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965, and it rained on them again last weekend as they commemorated the day when police beat civil rights marchers so badly that the date became known the nation over as Bloody Sunday. >>>>>> >>>>>> Fifty-four years have passed since that historic march for voting rights, but as the speakers lamented last weekend, we are still fighting for the right to vote today. >>>>>> >>>>>> However, as Rep. John Lewis told a crowd at the Civil Rights Memorial Center in Montgomery as part of the Bloody Sunday anniversary, ?We come with the spirit and the belief that we can change things. We have the power. We have the ability. We can do it.? >>>>>> >>>>>> Doing the hard work of achieving the ideals of the civil rights movement is the message of white academic and diversity trainer Robin DiAngelo?s recent book ?White Fragility.? It has spent seven months near the top of The New York Times bestseller list despite a challenging message to white people, its intended audience: When ? not if ? you perpetuate racism, don?t get defensive . >>>>>> >>>>>> ?In my experience, day in and day out, most white people are absolutely not receptive to finding out their impact on other people,? DiAngelo told Nosheen Iqbal for The Guardian. She recounted the way that ?They insist, ?Well, it?s not me?, or say ?I?m doing my best, what do you want from me??? >>>>>> >>>>>> One problem, DiAngelo says, is that white progressives often define racism as something obvious and violent ? like when police beat civil rights marchers in Selma in 1965 ? when the reality is that it is much more insidious. >>>>>> >>>>>> ?We have to stop thinking about racism simply as someone who says the N-word,? she told Iqbal. ?This book is centered in the white western colonial context, and in that context white people hold institutional power.? >>>>>> >>>>>> But over the course of 20 years of doing trainings around race and diversity, DiAngelo has discovered that white progressives who say they want to be allies to people of color are often nonetheless uncomfortable examining the impact of their own behavior . >>>>>> >>>>>> DiAngelo defines this as white fragility ? the inability of white people to tolerate racial stress. >>>>>> >>>>>> ?I want to build the stamina to handle the discomfort so we don?t retreat in the face of it, because retreating holds the status quo in place, and the status quo is the reproduction of racism,? DiAngelo explained. >>>>>> >>>>>> Without that stamina, white people who discover ways they may have accidentally perpetuated racial inequality and injustice too often ?weaponi[ze their] hurt feelings? by getting indignant and defensive, in turn creating a climate that makes their anxiety more important than the concerns of the people of color around them. >>>>>> >>>>>> As DiAngelo asks, ?If nobody is racist, why is racism still America?s biggest problem? What are white people afraid they will lose by listening?? >>>>>> >>>>>> It can be difficult to know how to do that in the moment. Our guide on how to respond to everyday bigotry can help. So can our guide on 10 ways to fight hate , one of which is to educate yourself through cross-racial conversations, like the kind DiAngelo has been promoting for decades. >>>>>> >>>>>> After all, within the white, western colonial context, DiAngelo points out: ?Racism is a white problem. It was constructed and created by white people and the ultimate responsibility lies with white people. For too long we?ve looked at it as if it were someone else?s problem.? >>>>>> >>>>>> On this anniversary of the march from Selma to Montgomery, when voter suppression is still rampant , police abuses are still violent , and civil rights are far from guaranteed , it could not be more clear. >>>>>> >>>>>> The Editors >>>>>> >>>>>> P.S. Here are some other pieces we think are valuable this week: >>>>>> >>>>>> Immigration detention has life-changing consequences for sisters by Liz Vinson for the Southern Poverty Law Center >>>>>> How a black man says he ?outsmarted? a neo-Nazi group and became their new leader by Katie Mettler for The Washington Post >>>>>> Kneeling during the anthem at Ole Miss: ?I needed to stand up for my rights? by Billy Witz for The New York Times >>>>>> Dollars on the margins by Matthew Desmond for The New York Times Magazine >>>>>> Was this message forwarded to you? Sign up to receive SPLC updates. >>>>>> Update Preferences | Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Copyright 2019 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Follow SPLC >>>>>> >>>>>> Southern Poverty Law Center >>>>>> 400 Washington Avenue >>>>>> Montgomery, AL 36104 >>>>>> 334.956.8200 // splcenter.org >>>>>> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Simangele Mayisela >>>>>> Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2019 12:54 PM >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering >>>>>> >>>>>> <> >>>>>> Dear Andy >>>>>> >>>>>> I browsed your ethical politics paper and found it to be moving. I realise my view of social capital has somehow been narrow as only focused on knowledge transfer ? conscious or unconscious. Thanks for providing the background of the concept. At a political and economic level, it reminds me of the South African ?Xolobeni? saga, where a rural community, located on beautiful coastal landscape with indigenous flora in the Eastern Cape is bulldozed by an Aissie mining company who ?obtained? mining rights from the government under the guise that this will bring development and jobs to the community. You can find the images and the news briefs on this social conundrum and the plight of the Exolobeni people on google This is where the need of social solidarity becomes paramount above the idea of social capital. Thanks for sharing?will read this paper in depth. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Simangele >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>>>>> Sent: 07 March 2019 04:00 PM >>>>>> To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Alternatives to Social Capital and Knowledge Brokering >>>>>> >>>>>> Social Solidarity versus ?Social Capital? >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/social.pdf >>>>>> material for your brainstorming. >>>>>> >>>>>> andy >>>>>> >>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>>>> On 8/03/2019 12:55 am, Greg Mcverry wrote: >>>>>> I really enjoy the thinking behind social capital and the related idea of knowledge brokering but find the free market/enterprise thinking problematic. >>>>>> >>>>>> Comes across as everyone is trying to gain all the time and learning gets defined sorta as a nuisance, "I guess I will teach you since you help the community" >>>>>> >>>>>> I know that is over simplified but something been bugging me about this for a long time, simply haven't found a better alternative or formulated my thinking. >>>>>> >>>>>> Playing with the idea of taking cognitive apprenticeships and recasting it as agentive apprenticeship to get at the bidirectional knowledge development and diffusion that occurs between both agents and networks. >>>>>> >>>>>> Anyone have ideas? Just using email to brainstorm. >>>>>> This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. >>>> >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190310/7a9d266e/attachment.html From simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za Mon Mar 11 00:40:35 2019 From: simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za (Simangele Mayisela) Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 07:40:35 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky In-Reply-To: <669390779.3749406.1552221591224@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1534121857228.33038@ils.uio.no> <1534154956936.24314@ils.uio.no> <1534176463415.1350@ils.uio.no> <669390779.3749406.1552221591224@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA8013395938E@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> Hi Helena I am not aware of any connection, nor did I knew Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky, thank you for sharing his writing, it resuscitates my interest in the use of African stories in play therapy. Regards, S?ma Dr. Simangele Mayisela (PhD) Senior Lecturer / Educational Psychologist Department of Psychology Transformation Chairperson School of Human and Community Development University of the Witwatersrand Tel: +27 11 717 4529 A man who calls his kinsmen to a feast does not do so to save them from starving. They all have food in their homes. When we gather together in the moonlit village ground, it is not because of the moon. Every man can see it in his own compound. We come together because it is good for kinsmen to do so (Chinua Achebe, 1959, p. 55). From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Haydi Zulfei Sent: Sunday, 10 March 2019 14:40 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky On Sunday, March 10, 2019, 7:22:29 AM GMT+3:30, Worthen, Helena Harlow > wrote: Does anyone on this list have knowledge of Vasyl Olexandrovych Sukhomlynsky, Ukranian educator ? younger than Vygotsky, author of works about children?s education, head teacher at country (regional?) school. Any connection with the Vygotsky-Luria line? Thanks - Helena Worthen This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190311/1feb6936/attachment.html From daniel.a.hyman.0@gmail.com Mon Mar 11 08:42:39 2019 From: daniel.a.hyman.0@gmail.com (Daniel Hyman) Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 11:42:39 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Tom, This topic is welcome indeed. Please consider the crafts of playing, hearing, teaching, and building/maintaining musical instruments. I personally specialize in playing violin and viola, and teaching (hence at times rescuing) same. My craft training has taken me to Indiana/Bloomington, Sarah Lawrence, CUNY/Queens College, Carnegie Mellon, Cincinnati, Aspen, Teachers College, and the Suzuki-based School For Strings in NYC. I continue also as a vocalist and very slowly budding pianist. These specialties not only tie directly to development via hands-on learning and experience. They also spark and require reflection, imagination, invention, and wordless, affect-rich thought. Concert-goers and musicians alike, also experience the longitudinal deepening of the experience of hearing/performing the "same" work. At times this is in genres calling for change in the moment, e.g. jazz, or Baroque ornamentation, but often as well when all the notes are exactly the same as before, or when historically-informed performance offers newly restored/revised versions of familiar works. I live in Long Island, so if you have occasion to follow up offline, that would be great. Kind regards, Daniel On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 8:41 PM Tom Martin wrote: > Hello XMCA, > > Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on > this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this > question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational > education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their > market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, > through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. > > My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is > interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have > recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I > would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and > perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people > with complementary interests. > > I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further illustrate > the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at > https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. > > A million thanks in advance, > > Tom Martin > > > > > ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim that > learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons that > extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning their > perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are > introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can > relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a > short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not > entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it > does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental > mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings > with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop > allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and > context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, > exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for > meaning-making. > > This conception of boat building as a medium through which our fundamental > mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to a vision of > craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal growth rather > than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, > competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded education, > which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with others in > society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we support one > another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, > intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily incompatible: > > *...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it > with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted > with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be > liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is > freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities > (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.)* > > In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey > (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a > liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue > that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of > educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What > does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal > of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social > world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus > on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, > the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived > of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I > provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining > tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the > aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes > apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. > My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the > technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively > understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in > their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. > > In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the > learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal > education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who > would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides > the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those > traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal > education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the > world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a > good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for > instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that > the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of > ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in > physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and > numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be > considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, > especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual > understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon > which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether > opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale > craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) > suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190311/3bbd7882/attachment.html From hshonerd@gmail.com Mon Mar 11 10:03:13 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 11:03:13 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts/ Maker movement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Daniel and Tom, You will recall perhaps the push back when Bob Dylan went electronic with his music. I see a connection with this subject line on craftwork in education. Folk music enthusiasts, perhaps, saw what Dylan was doing on an acoustic guitar as real folk music, the sound of the guitar unmodified electronically. Even more authentic would be folk music without amplification through a PA system? In the same way, perhaps, craftwork is defined by the tecnologies that mediate between the creator and the final product. The only music that is unmediated is song. But song is typically mediated through language. And the use of the vocal chords without words involves mediation, in the same way that the entire body is the medium for dance. What I think is most powerful and human about craftwork is how embodied the mediating is, how immediate, how in touch with the senses at their most basic. That, maybe, is where Dylan went to the dark side. And it was all about commodification. Curricula in education are always in danger of being commodified in the same way. Perhaps the make movement is a way out? What I mean is, do you see a connection between craftwork and the maker movement? Sorry to be so long winded in getting to the question! Henry > On Mar 11, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Daniel Hyman wrote: > > Dear Tom, > > This topic is welcome indeed. Please consider the crafts of playing, hearing, teaching, and building/maintaining musical instruments. I personally specialize in playing violin and viola, and teaching (hence at times rescuing) same. My craft training has taken me to Indiana/Bloomington, Sarah Lawrence, CUNY/Queens College, Carnegie Mellon, Cincinnati, Aspen, Teachers College, and the Suzuki-based School For Strings in NYC. I continue also as a vocalist and very slowly budding pianist. > > These specialties not only tie directly to development via hands-on learning and experience. They also spark and require reflection, imagination, invention, and wordless, affect-rich thought. Concert-goers and musicians alike, also experience the longitudinal deepening of the experience of hearing/performing the "same" work. At times this is in genres calling for change in the moment, e.g. jazz, or Baroque ornamentation, but often as well when all the notes are exactly the same as before, or when historically-informed performance offers newly restored/revised versions of familiar works. > > I live in Long Island, so if you have occasion to follow up offline, that would be great. > > Kind regards, > > Daniel > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 8:41 PM Tom Martin > wrote: > Hello XMCA, > > Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. > > My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people with complementary interests. > > I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further illustrate the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. > > A million thanks in advance, > > Tom Martin > > > > > ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim that learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons that extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning their perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for meaning-making. > > This conception of boat building as a medium through which our fundamental mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to a vision of craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal growth rather than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded education, which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with others in society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we support one another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily incompatible: > > ...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.) > > In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. > > In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190311/e47225e2/attachment-0001.html From daniel.a.hyman.0@gmail.com Mon Mar 11 11:39:40 2019 From: daniel.a.hyman.0@gmail.com (Daniel Hyman) Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 14:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts/ Maker movement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Excellent point, Henry - my high school south of Pittsburgh had wood shop, metal shop, electronics, and a plentiful supply of Band-Aids. If we're referring to the same Maker Movement as in https://www.edutopia.org/blog/maker-movement-moving-into-classrooms-vicki-davis I not only see a connection; I can still smell the varnish and feel the different grades of sandpaper and steel wool. There wasn't, back then, an overt effort to "rise above" mere "manual labor", generalize, abstract, or any of that. We made tables, bookends, and the like, as well as we could. On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 1:06 PM HENRY SHONERD wrote: > Daniel and Tom, > You will recall perhaps the push back when Bob Dylan went electronic with > his music. I see a connection with this subject line on craftwork in > education. Folk music enthusiasts, perhaps, saw what Dylan was doing on an > acoustic guitar as real folk music, the sound of the guitar unmodified > electronically. Even more authentic would be folk music without > amplification through a PA system? In the same way, perhaps, craftwork is > defined by the tecnologies that mediate between the creator and the final > product. The only music that is unmediated is song. But song is typically > mediated through language. And the use of the vocal chords without words > involves mediation, in the same way that the entire body is the medium for > dance. What I think is most powerful and human about craftwork is how > embodied the mediating is, how immediate, how in touch with the senses at > their most basic. That, maybe, is where Dylan went to the dark side. And it > was all about commodification. Curricula in education are always in danger > of being commodified in the same way. Perhaps the make movement is a way > out? What I mean is, do you see a connection between craftwork and the > maker movement? Sorry to be so long winded in getting to the question! > Henry > > > On Mar 11, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Daniel Hyman > wrote: > > Dear Tom, > > This topic is welcome indeed. Please consider the crafts of playing, > hearing, teaching, and building/maintaining musical instruments. I > personally specialize in playing violin and viola, and teaching (hence at > times rescuing) same. My craft training has taken me to > Indiana/Bloomington, Sarah Lawrence, CUNY/Queens College, Carnegie Mellon, > Cincinnati, Aspen, Teachers College, and the Suzuki-based School For > Strings in NYC. I continue also as a vocalist and very slowly budding > pianist. > > These specialties not only tie directly to development via hands-on > learning and experience. They also spark and require reflection, > imagination, invention, and wordless, affect-rich thought. Concert-goers > and musicians alike, also experience the longitudinal deepening of the > experience of hearing/performing the "same" work. At times this is in > genres calling for change in the moment, e.g. jazz, or Baroque > ornamentation, but often as well when all the notes are exactly the same as > before, or when historically-informed performance offers newly > restored/revised versions of familiar works. > > I live in Long Island, so if you have occasion to follow up offline, that > would be great. > > Kind regards, > > Daniel > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 8:41 PM Tom Martin > wrote: > >> Hello XMCA, >> >> Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on >> this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this >> question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational >> education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their >> market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, >> through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. >> >> My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is >> interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have >> recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I >> would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and >> perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people >> with complementary interests. >> >> I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further >> illustrate the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at >> https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. >> >> A million thanks in advance, >> >> Tom Martin >> >> >> >> >> ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim >> that learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons >> that extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning >> their perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are >> introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can >> relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a >> short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not >> entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it >> does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental >> mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings >> with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop >> allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and >> context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, >> exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for >> meaning-making. >> >> This conception of boat building as a medium through which our >> fundamental mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to >> a vision of craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal >> growth rather than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). >> Of course, competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded >> education, which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with >> others in society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we >> support one another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, >> however, intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily >> incompatible: >> >> *...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it >> with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted >> with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be >> liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is >> freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities >> (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.)* >> >> In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey >> (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a >> liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue >> that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of >> educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What >> does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal >> of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social >> world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus >> on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, >> the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived >> of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I >> provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining >> tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the >> aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes >> apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. >> My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the >> technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively >> understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in >> their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. >> >> In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the >> learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal >> education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who >> would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides >> the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those >> traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal >> education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the >> world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a >> good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for >> instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that >> the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of >> ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in >> physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and >> numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be >> considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, >> especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual >> understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon >> which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether >> opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale >> craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) >> suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190311/7210c895/attachment.html From hshonerd@gmail.com Mon Mar 11 14:59:59 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 15:59:59 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts/ Maker movement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5316053B-343F-43F6-9BC6-9BBBBF411FFE@gmail.com> The link is fantastic, Daniel! It?s the July 2014 issue of the on line journal Edutopia (funded it appears by George Lucas). Reading only through the lead article on the Maker Movement is eye opening for me, and the video of a classroom where tinkering is done by students 6-12, is inspiring. Let?s face it, education needs to be reimagined top to bottom. And many of the articles that follow the one on the Maker Movement are clearly inspired by what I am thinking about. As a retired teacher educator I want to get back in and tinker with education. Or at least be in touch with those in the trenches who are re-imag(en)ing education. You say ?back then? when you talk about wood shop when you taught high school. I guess you have retired? If you?re like me, you may have more time now to make look for ideas like tthe Maker Movement than you did back then, at least if you were working within the framework available. From Seymour Pappert in the article you linked me to: "[T]he same old teaching becomes incredibly more expensive and biased toward its dumbest parts, namely the kind of rote learning in which measurable results can be obtained by treating the children like pigeons in a Skinner box.? Not only less inspired, but more expensive! Money down Skinner?s rathole! Just saying. Henry > On Mar 11, 2019, at 12:39 PM, Daniel Hyman wrote: > > Excellent point, Henry - my high school south of Pittsburgh had wood shop, metal shop, electronics, and a plentiful supply of Band-Aids. If we're referring to the same Maker Movement as in https://www.edutopia.org/blog/maker-movement-moving-into-classrooms-vicki-davis I not only see a connection; I can still smell the varnish and feel the different grades of sandpaper and steel wool. There wasn't, back then, an overt effort to "rise above" mere "manual labor", generalize, abstract, or any of that. We made tables, bookends, and the like, as well as we could. > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 1:06 PM HENRY SHONERD > wrote: > Daniel and Tom, > You will recall perhaps the push back when Bob Dylan went electronic with his music. I see a connection with this subject line on craftwork in education. Folk music enthusiasts, perhaps, saw what Dylan was doing on an acoustic guitar as real folk music, the sound of the guitar unmodified electronically. Even more authentic would be folk music without amplification through a PA system? In the same way, perhaps, craftwork is defined by the tecnologies that mediate between the creator and the final product. The only music that is unmediated is song. But song is typically mediated through language. And the use of the vocal chords without words involves mediation, in the same way that the entire body is the medium for dance. What I think is most powerful and human about craftwork is how embodied the mediating is, how immediate, how in touch with the senses at their most basic. That, maybe, is where Dylan went to the dark side. And it was all about commodification. Curricula in education are always in danger of being commodified in the same way. Perhaps the make movement is a way out? What I mean is, do you see a connection between craftwork and the maker movement? Sorry to be so long winded in getting to the question! > Henry > > >> On Mar 11, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Daniel Hyman > wrote: >> >> Dear Tom, >> >> This topic is welcome indeed. Please consider the crafts of playing, hearing, teaching, and building/maintaining musical instruments. I personally specialize in playing violin and viola, and teaching (hence at times rescuing) same. My craft training has taken me to Indiana/Bloomington, Sarah Lawrence, CUNY/Queens College, Carnegie Mellon, Cincinnati, Aspen, Teachers College, and the Suzuki-based School For Strings in NYC. I continue also as a vocalist and very slowly budding pianist. >> >> These specialties not only tie directly to development via hands-on learning and experience. They also spark and require reflection, imagination, invention, and wordless, affect-rich thought. Concert-goers and musicians alike, also experience the longitudinal deepening of the experience of hearing/performing the "same" work. At times this is in genres calling for change in the moment, e.g. jazz, or Baroque ornamentation, but often as well when all the notes are exactly the same as before, or when historically-informed performance offers newly restored/revised versions of familiar works. >> >> I live in Long Island, so if you have occasion to follow up offline, that would be great. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Daniel >> >> On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 8:41 PM Tom Martin > wrote: >> Hello XMCA, >> >> Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. >> >> My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people with complementary interests. >> >> I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further illustrate the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. >> >> A million thanks in advance, >> >> Tom Martin >> >> >> >> >> ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim that learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons that extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning their perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for meaning-making. >> >> This conception of boat building as a medium through which our fundamental mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to a vision of craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal growth rather than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). Of course, competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded education, which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with others in society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we support one another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, however, intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily incompatible: >> >> ...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.) >> >> In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. >> >> In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190311/1d09f10b/attachment.html From daniel.a.hyman.0@gmail.com Wed Mar 13 16:45:42 2019 From: daniel.a.hyman.0@gmail.com (Daniel Hyman) Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 19:45:42 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Craftwork as Liberal Education - interested contacts/ Maker movement In-Reply-To: <5316053B-343F-43F6-9BC6-9BBBBF411FFE@gmail.com> References: <5316053B-343F-43F6-9BC6-9BBBBF411FFE@gmail.com> Message-ID: Very glad we are agreed on so many points, Henry. From the NYC DOE's viewpoint I'm indeed retired. However, it's the kind of retirement (more of an emigration from the classroom) wherein I teach studio music lessons seven days a week, and play and sing concerts fairly often. (Those high school shop experiences were as a student.) As to Dr. Papert's apt quote, it was equally much the increasingly Walmart-ized rote instruction that really helped me understand where I did and did not belong. Kind regards, Daniel On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 6:02 PM HENRY SHONERD wrote: > The link is fantastic, Daniel! It?s the July 2014 issue of the on line > journal Edutopia (funded it appears by George Lucas). Reading only through > the lead article on the Maker Movement is eye opening for me, and the video > of a classroom where tinkering is done by students 6-12, is inspiring. > Let?s face it, education needs to be reimagined top to bottom. And many of > the articles that follow the one on the Maker Movement are clearly inspired > by what I am thinking about. As a retired teacher educator I want to get > back in and tinker with education. Or at least be in touch with those in > the trenches who are re-imag(en)ing education. You say ?back then? when you > talk about wood shop when you taught high school. I guess you have retired? > If you?re like me, you may have more time now to make look for ideas like > tthe Maker Movement than you did back then, at least if you were working > within the framework available. From Seymour Pappert in the article you > linked me to: > "[T]he same old teaching becomes incredibly more expensive and biased > toward its dumbest parts, namely the kind of rote learning in which > measurable results can be obtained by treating the children like pigeons in > a Skinner box.? > Not only less inspired, but more expensive! Money down Skinner?s rathole! > Just saying. > Henry > > > On Mar 11, 2019, at 12:39 PM, Daniel Hyman > wrote: > > Excellent point, Henry - my high school south of Pittsburgh had wood shop, > metal shop, electronics, and a plentiful supply of Band-Aids. If we're > referring to the same Maker Movement as in > https://www.edutopia.org/blog/maker-movement-moving-into-classrooms-vicki-davis > I not only see a connection; I can still smell the varnish and feel the > different grades of sandpaper and steel wool. There wasn't, back then, an > overt effort to "rise above" mere "manual labor", generalize, abstract, or > any of that. We made tables, bookends, and the like, as well as we could. > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 1:06 PM HENRY SHONERD wrote: > >> Daniel and Tom, >> You will recall perhaps the push back when Bob Dylan went electronic with >> his music. I see a connection with this subject line on craftwork in >> education. Folk music enthusiasts, perhaps, saw what Dylan was doing on an >> acoustic guitar as real folk music, the sound of the guitar unmodified >> electronically. Even more authentic would be folk music without >> amplification through a PA system? In the same way, perhaps, craftwork is >> defined by the tecnologies that mediate between the creator and the final >> product. The only music that is unmediated is song. But song is typically >> mediated through language. And the use of the vocal chords without words >> involves mediation, in the same way that the entire body is the medium for >> dance. What I think is most powerful and human about craftwork is how >> embodied the mediating is, how immediate, how in touch with the senses at >> their most basic. That, maybe, is where Dylan went to the dark side. And it >> was all about commodification. Curricula in education are always in danger >> of being commodified in the same way. Perhaps the make movement is a way >> out? What I mean is, do you see a connection between craftwork and the >> maker movement? Sorry to be so long winded in getting to the question! >> Henry >> >> >> On Mar 11, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Daniel Hyman >> wrote: >> >> Dear Tom, >> >> This topic is welcome indeed. Please consider the crafts of playing, >> hearing, teaching, and building/maintaining musical instruments. I >> personally specialize in playing violin and viola, and teaching (hence at >> times rescuing) same. My craft training has taken me to >> Indiana/Bloomington, Sarah Lawrence, CUNY/Queens College, Carnegie Mellon, >> Cincinnati, Aspen, Teachers College, and the Suzuki-based School For >> Strings in NYC. I continue also as a vocalist and very slowly budding >> pianist. >> >> These specialties not only tie directly to development via hands-on >> learning and experience. They also spark and require reflection, >> imagination, invention, and wordless, affect-rich thought. Concert-goers >> and musicians alike, also experience the longitudinal deepening of the >> experience of hearing/performing the "same" work. At times this is in >> genres calling for change in the moment, e.g. jazz, or Baroque >> ornamentation, but often as well when all the notes are exactly the same as >> before, or when historically-informed performance offers newly >> restored/revised versions of familiar works. >> >> I live in Long Island, so if you have occasion to follow up offline, that >> would be great. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Daniel >> >> On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 8:41 PM Tom Martin >> wrote: >> >>> Hello XMCA, >>> >>> Apologies if this is a little off-topic, but as a long-timer lurker on >>> this list, I suspect you all might have some helpful input into this >>> question. My interest is in the ?liberal? side of craft/vocational >>> education ? i.e., how practical skills have educational worth beyond their >>> market value; how they demonstrate a fundamental mode of understanding, >>> through which learners might find personal and intellectual fulfillment. >>> >>> My specific question is who I might connect with in the USA who is >>> interested in these themes. After finishing a PhD at Oxford, I have >>> recently relocated to NYC, where my academic contacts are quite sparse. I >>> would be very interested in having this conversation in more depth, and >>> perhaps even publishing/working with others, if I were able to find people >>> with complementary interests. >>> >>> I have included a relevant excerpt from my PhD below to further >>> illustrate the topic I?m asking about. The full text is online at >>> https://ora.ox.ac.uk/ (search my name), for anyone curious. >>> >>> A million thanks in advance, >>> >>> Tom Martin >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ? Having served as a workshop trainee myself, I can confidently claim >>> that learning to build wooden boats is a worthwhile undertaking for reasons >>> that extend far past the market value of the resulting skills. In aligning >>> their perception with that of those around them, novices like myself are >>> introduced to the possible depth of understanding that perception can >>> relate, as well as with the nuance in meaning that can be comprehended in a >>> short glance or with a passing touch. While getting ?the feel? does not >>> entail developing an entirely new way of interacting with the world, it >>> does require exploring the extent of the possibilities of our fundamental >>> mode of understanding, which we take for granted in our everyday dealings >>> with physical things. Working somewhere like the wooden boat workshop >>> allows the learner to encounter the myriad layers of meaning and >>> context-bound purposes that operate at once within such a complex system, >>> exposing him or her to the full extent of our inherent human capacity for >>> meaning-making. >>> >>> This conception of boat building as a medium through which our >>> fundamental mechanism for understanding the world can be refined points to >>> a vision of craft as ?liberal education?, a mode of fostering personal >>> growth rather than solely achieving extrinsic ends (Peters, 1970b, p. 43). >>> Of course, competence at work should still be a concern in a well-rounded >>> education, which serves as an introduction to ways of interacting with >>> others in society, fulfilling the collective functions through which we >>> support one another?s needs (see Dewey, 1916/2004). As Pring points out, >>> however, intellectual growth and training for work are not necessarily >>> incompatible: >>> >>> *...there is a mistaken tendency to define education by contrasting it >>> with what is seen to be opposite and incompatible. ?Liberal? is contrasted >>> with vocational as if the vocational, properly taught, cannot itself be >>> liberating ? a way into those forms of knowledge through which a person is >>> freed from ignorance, and opened to new imaginings, new possibilities >>> (Pring, 2004, p. 57; org. emp.)* >>> >>> In the passage above, Pring echoes long-standing criticisms by Dewey >>> (1916/2004) and Oakeshott (1989), who challenge the notion of a >>> liberal/vocational divide in education. Collectively, these authors argue >>> that subject matter has little bearing on the promise for fulfilment of >>> educational aims such as intellectual growth and personal fulfilment. What >>> does matter is the perspective from which a subject is taught; if the goal >>> of teaching is to foster new ways of engaging with the material and social >>> world, then the outcome might rightly be called ?education?. A strict focus >>> on the production of finished goods, by contrast, leads only to ?training?, >>> the memorisation of routines detached from context and therefore deprived >>> of their full significance. Returning to the definition of ?craft? that I >>> provided in the Introduction (Chapter 1) ? organised practice combining >>> tools, materials, and the body, joined with a sensibility for the >>> aesthetic, social, and practical value of the objects produced ? it becomes >>> apparent that craft learning is therefore liberal education, by definition. >>> My analysis throughout this thesis merely serves to translate into the >>> technical language of philosophy the premise that craftspeople intuitively >>> understand, that historical ways of working with tools and materials in >>> their meaningful contexts demand a highly-sharpened intellect. >>> >>> In arguing that craft learning is intellectually comparable to the >>> learning of literature, history, and the other mainstays of liberal >>> education, I do not merely mean to defend craft education against those who >>> would see it as mere job training. Indeed, this investigation also provides >>> the logical foundation for asking what craft learning provides that those >>> traditional ?liberal arts? do not. Peters (1970) argues that a liberal >>> education cannot result in a single, narrow mode of understanding the >>> world, writing that ?[n]o scientist should emerge, for instance, without a >>> good understanding of other ways of looking at the world, historically, for >>> instance, or aesthetically? (p. 44). The circumspective understanding that >>> the wooden boat builders employ demonstrates a rich, nuanced way of >>> ?looking at the world? in the most literal sense, recognising meaning in >>> physical objects and their interrelationships rather than through words and >>> numbers. Following Peters, it is possible to ask whether a person can be >>> considered well educated without refining their perceptual capacities, >>> especially if, as Heidegger asserts, pre-reflective perceptual >>> understanding is our foundational mode of engaging with the world, upon >>> which other ways of knowing are founded. Unfortunately, one wonders whether >>> opportunities to nurture such understanding are disappearing as small-scale >>> craftwork is replaced by mechanised mass production, as Heidegger (1968) >>> suggests in his final lectures on understanding in the era of technology. >>> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190313/9f4f4324/attachment.html From arturo.escandon@gmail.com Fri Mar 15 00:27:58 2019 From: arturo.escandon@gmail.com (Arturo Escandon) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 16:27:58 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> Message-ID: Hi everyone. I just happen to read this old thread. It is my impression when I was doing my PhD and tried to get around the notion of language and more into the notion of speaking (or communication if you will) that De Saussure actually was inspired in many ways by Hegel's theory of systems when producing his categories of langage/langue/parole. Furthermore, it seems than Hegel anticipated many Saussurian ideas on the arbitrariness of the linguistic sign, its relationship with concepts, and writing systems in general. As you can clearly see when translating Vygotsky's Thought and language/Thinking and speaking we struggle with Saussurean terminology to convey what that "language" is. There are many passages of the Cours that match Hegel's Encyclopedia. I could not address all these issues in my thesis and I opted for deploying the notion of discourse instead of speech. In that way I got rid of the notion of language as system comprising all utterances (much or less as all commodities form the market). However, I did not solve the underlying issue of how abbreviation works in discourse (or language). There are also many ontological problems with Vygotsky's notion of interiorization and inner speech if we get rid of a Saussurean understanding of language as system or what linguists call a segregationist view of language (language as a reified object that only makes sense within an objectified system). Best, Arturo On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 at 02:04, James Ma wrote: > Andy, this sounds rather unwise - I'm afraid your line of argument is not > entirely tenable. > I'll get back to you again when I have more time. > James > > *_______________________________________________________* > > *James Ma Independent Scholar * > *https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa > * > > On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 at 22:54, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> It is clearly wrong to say that we can't study language objectively >> because we exist and think in it - in speech and writing, language is >> objective and actual, so we can also observe it. But to study language >> objectively, from "outside," requires the student to acquire a certain >> distance from it. Teaching grammar is one way of achieving that, even >> writing too, I guess, and anyone who learns a second language has a point >> from which to view their first language. Thus we can learn that "Je ne sais >> pas" is not necessarily a double negative. But is the interviewer who asks >> an artist to explain their painting failing to stand outside language to >> see that there is something else. Like the psychologists who ask subjects >> questions and take the answer to be what the person "really" thought. It's >> the old problem of Kant's supposed "thing-in-itself" beyond experience >> which (in my opinion) Hegel so thoroughly debunked >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 2/01/2019 7:46 am, David Kellogg wrote: >> >> Happy new year to all, especially to all us happy pigs born in a pig >> year. >> >> Yes, "absurd" is too strong: it is possible to construct a context in >> which "I think" isn't a grammatical metaphor for "may", "should", or "it is >> possible". But of course the whole post was a semantic metaphor for James' >> statement that you cannot study language objectively and use it at the same >> time. >> >> And semantics is the weak point of Saussure. The problem is that there >> isn't anything "arbitraire" or conventional about semantics: to say that >> semantics is arbitrary is essentially to say that thinking is arbitrary: >> that there is no rational reason why we think of time as tense and entity >> as number. It's not just that we can't think any other way; it's that we >> have to grow crops and teach children in real time, and we have to gather >> food and cook it in real numbers. >> >> Language is arbitrary (i.e. "subjective") at only one point: phonetics. >> But even with phonetics (paradoxically the easiest to measure objectively) >> you have to deal with the fact that humans make a finite number of sounds, >> and only a small subset of these are maximally distinguishable at a >> distance. That's why (another paradox) at the very time that Saussure was >> developing a purely idealist, subjectivist study of language, teachers were >> creating the international phonetic alphabet we still use today. It's a >> menu, and menus suggest some element of choice. But choices can be >> constrained, and contraints are always motivated. >> >> Having twelve months and three hundred and sixty five days a year only >> seems "arbitrary" when you are not a farmer.If you were born in the pig >> year (as I was) this is a particularly auspicious year, particularly if you >> are completing your fifth complete cycle of twelve years (as I am). But the >> reason why five cycles of twelve years is considered particularly >> auspicious is no more arbitrary than the choice of the pig to name the >> year: it's a likespan of sixty years, which in Confucian times was >> considered just about ideal. >> >> David Kellogg >> Sangmyung University >> >> New in *Language and Literature*, co-authored with Fang Li: >> Mountains in labour: Eliot?s ?Atrocities? and Woolf?s >> alternatives >> Show all authors >> >> https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947018805660 >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 2:45 PM Rein Raud wrote: >> >>> Happy New Year, David, >>> >>> Why do you say that (a) is absurd? Let us assume that this is what a >>> scholar tells herself after a long internal thought-chain, weighing the >>> pros and cons of a certain argument about how to study the human body, >>> finally arriving at an unexpected conclusion, perhaps persuaded by someone >>> else?s work. And at this point she says to herself ?Hey, come on, I don't >>> really think we can study the human body objectively, do I?? >>> >>> ?Thinking something? (endorsing a particular claim) and ?thinking? >>> (entertaining certain mental processes) are not the same thing, even though >>> conflated in the English word ?think?. But in the first case you can >>> substitute it with some synonyms (?reckon?, for example), while in others >>> you cannot. You ask ?can you write "I don't think" without thinking?? but >>> you probably wouldn?t ask ?can you write "I don't reckon" without >>> reckoning?? >>> >>> Best wishes for 2019 to the whole community, >>> >>> Rein >>> >>> ********************************************** >>> Rein Raud >>> Professor of Asian and Cultural Studies, Tallinn University >>> Uus-Sadama 5, Tallinn 10120 Estonia >>> www.reinraud.com >>> >>> >>> ?Meaning in Action: Outline of an Integral Theory of Culture?(Polity >>> 2016) >>> ?Practices of Selfhood? (with Zygmunt Bauman, Polity 2015) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 1 Jan 2019, at 07:29, David Kellogg wrote: >>> >>> Suppose I say something like this: >>> >>> "I don't think we can study the human body objectively because we are >>> already users of bodies when studying them, i.e. we must remain insiders of >>> our bodies in order to study them, plus the fact that we have the will to >>> embodiment, so to speak." >>> >>> I might be comfortable with a statement like this if I read through it >>> quickly and I don't think about it for too long, provided I am in good >>> health and don't require a doctor (If I fall seriously ill and I go to a >>> doctor, and receive a statement like this, I will probably want a second >>> opinion). >>> >>> But alas, I am arrested by the first three words. What does it mean to >>> say "I don't think"? Can you write "I don't think" without thinking? Is >>> this an instance of aphophasis, like "not to mention"? >>> >>> Because I do study language--and study it objectively--I know that "i >>> don't think" is an interpersonal metaphor: it's a modal, a statement of >>> probability, like the expression "cannot" (which is also a contradiction, >>> when you think about it, because there isn't any such thing as negative >>> probability). >>> >>> This is easy to prove. You just add a tag: >>> >>> a) "I don't think we can study the human body objectively, do I?" >>> b) "I don't think we can study the human body objectively, can we?" >>> >>> It should be obvious that a) is absurd, and b) is what is meant. But >>> isn't that an objective test? Or do you just mean that the phenomena of >>> language don't appear under a microscope? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> David Kellogg >>> Sangmyung University >>> >>> New in *Language and Literature*, co-authored with Fang Li: >>> Mountains in labour: Eliot?s ?Atrocities? and Woolf?s >>> alternatives >>> Show all authors >>> >>> https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947018805660 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 4:52 AM James Ma wrote: >>> >>>> Andy, here're my thoughts with respect to your message: >>>> >>>> I think "default", as a state of the human mind, is intuitive and *a >>>> posteriori* rather than of something we get hung up on deliberately or >>>> voluntarily. This state of mind is also multifaceted, depending on the >>>> context in which we find ourselves. Perhaps there might be a prototype of >>>> default that is somehow intrinsic, but I'm not sure about that. >>>> >>>> Yes, Saussure's structuralism is profoundly influential, without which >>>> post-Saussurean thought, including post-structuralism, wouldn't have >>>> existed. Seemingly, none of these theorists could have worked out their >>>> ideas without the inspiration and challenge of Saussure. Take for example >>>> the Russian linguist Jakobson, which I think would suffice (never mind >>>> those Francophone geniuses you might have referred to!). Jakobson extended >>>> and modified Saussure's signs, using communicative functions as the object >>>> of linguistic studies (instead of standardised rules of a given language, >>>> i.e. *langue* in Saussure's terms). He replaced langue with "code" to >>>> denote the goal-directedness of communicative functions. Each of the codes >>>> was thus associated with its own langue as a larger system. >>>> >>>> It seems to me that Saussure's semiology is not simply dualistic. >>>> There's more to it, e.g. the system of signification bridging between a >>>> concept (signified) and a sound image (signifier). Strictly speaking, the >>>> system of signification is not concerned with language but linguistics >>>> within which language lends itself to scrutiny and related concepts become >>>> valid. From Jakobson's viewpoint, this system is more than a normalised >>>> collective norm; it contains personal meanings not necessarily compatible >>>> with that norm. Saussure would say this norm is the *parole* that >>>> involves an individual's preference and creativity. I find Jakobson's code >>>> quite liberating - it helps explain the workings of Chinese dialects >>>> (different to dialects within the British English), e.g. the grammatical >>>> structure of Shanghainese, which is in many aspects at variance with >>>> Mandarin (the official language or predominant dialect). >>>> >>>> By the way, I don't think we can study a language objectively because >>>> we are already users of that language when studying it, i.e. we must remain >>>> insiders of that language in order to study it, plus the fact that we have >>>> the will to meaning, so to speak. >>>> >>>> James >>>> *_______________________________________________________* >>>> >>>> *James Ma Independent Scholar * >>>> *https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa >>>> * >>>> >>>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 03:03, Andy Blunden wrote: >>>> >>>>> Getting to your first topic, now, James ... >>>>> >>>>> I think it is inescapable for any of us, in everyday interactions, to >>>>> "default" to the Saussurian way of seeing things, that is to say, signs as >>>>> pointing to objects, in a structure of differences, abstracted from >>>>> historical development. The structural view always gives us certain >>>>> insights which can be invisible otherwise. But like a lot of things, in >>>>> making this point, Saussure set up this dichotomy with himself on one side >>>>> and condemned half a century of his followers in Structuralism to a >>>>> one-sided view of the world ... which made the poststructuralists look like >>>>> geniuses of course, when they stepped outside this cage >>>>> >>>>> What do you think? >>>>> >>>>> Andy >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>>> On 21/12/2018 7:56 am, James Ma wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Andy, thank you for your message. Just to make a few brief points, >>>>> linking with some of your comments: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> First, I have a default sense of signs based on Saussurean linguistics >>>>> (semiology); however, I don't think I "strangely leap from Peirce's >>>>> semiotics to Saussure's semiology". When I read Peirce and Vygotsky on >>>>> signs, I often have a Saussurean imagery present in my mind. As I see it, >>>>> Saussurean semiology is foundational to all language studies, such as the >>>>> evolution of language in terms of e.g. semantic drift and narrowing. >>>>> Speaking more broadly, in my view, both synchronic and diachronic approach >>>>> to language have relevance for CHAT. Above all, *a priori *hermeneutic >>>>> methodology can benefit further development of semiotic methodology within >>>>> CHAT, helping us to come to grips with what Max Fisch, the key Peircean >>>>> exponent, referred to as "the most essential point", i.e. the tripartite of >>>>> thought as semiosis, namely sign-interpretation or sign action. For >>>>> example, how sign action might be implicated in culture and consciousness. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190315/d554b21c/attachment.html From dkellogg60@gmail.com Fri Mar 15 01:59:13 2019 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:59:13 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> Message-ID: Arturo-- It's Roy Harris who divides linguists into "segregationists" and "integrationists" like himself (which is why the terminology seems rather biased in favor of his 'integrationism'). I think the distinction is a quite specious one: Harris simply insists on the incommensurability of communicative acts, and therefore refuses to talk about linguistic science at all. Certainly, Harris has very harsh things to say about both Saussure (who he translated into English and commentated in a separate volume) and Peirce (who he considers a myopic print-fetishist). Harris is a very entertaining read, but has remarkably little to say by way of positive programme. Isn't it interesting that people who do not rise to the level of theory (because integrationism really precludes all forms of analysis of language as an abstract code) also refuse to descend to the level of practice? David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 4:31 PM Arturo Escandon wrote: > Hi everyone. > > I just happen to read this old thread. > > It is my impression when I was doing my PhD and tried to get around the > notion of language and more into the notion of speaking (or communication > if you will) that De Saussure actually was inspired in many ways by Hegel's > theory of systems when producing his categories of langage/langue/parole. > Furthermore, it seems than Hegel anticipated many Saussurian ideas on the > arbitrariness of the linguistic sign, its relationship with concepts, and > writing systems in general. > > As you can clearly see when translating Vygotsky's Thought and > language/Thinking and speaking we struggle with Saussurean terminology to > convey what that "language" is. > > There are many passages of the Cours that match Hegel's Encyclopedia. > > I could not address all these issues in my thesis and I opted for > deploying the notion of discourse instead of speech. In that way I got rid > of the notion of language as system comprising all utterances (much or less > as all commodities form the market). However, I did not solve the > underlying issue of how abbreviation works in discourse (or language). > > There are also many ontological problems with Vygotsky's notion of > interiorization and inner speech if we get rid of a Saussurean > understanding of language as system or what linguists call a segregationist > view of language (language as a reified object that only makes sense > within an objectified system). > > Best, > > Arturo > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 at 02:04, James Ma wrote: > >> Andy, this sounds rather unwise - I'm afraid your line of argument is not >> entirely tenable. >> I'll get back to you again when I have more time. >> James >> >> *_______________________________________________________* >> >> *James Ma Independent Scholar * >> *https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa >> * >> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 at 22:54, Andy Blunden wrote: >> >>> It is clearly wrong to say that we can't study language objectively >>> because we exist and think in it - in speech and writing, language is >>> objective and actual, so we can also observe it. But to study language >>> objectively, from "outside," requires the student to acquire a certain >>> distance from it. Teaching grammar is one way of achieving that, even >>> writing too, I guess, and anyone who learns a second language has a point >>> from which to view their first language. Thus we can learn that "Je ne sais >>> pas" is not necessarily a double negative. But is the interviewer who asks >>> an artist to explain their painting failing to stand outside language to >>> see that there is something else. Like the psychologists who ask subjects >>> questions and take the answer to be what the person "really" thought. It's >>> the old problem of Kant's supposed "thing-in-itself" beyond experience >>> which (in my opinion) Hegel so thoroughly debunked >>> >>> Andy >>> ------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> On 2/01/2019 7:46 am, David Kellogg wrote: >>> >>> Happy new year to all, especially to all us happy pigs born in a pig >>> year. >>> >>> Yes, "absurd" is too strong: it is possible to construct a context in >>> which "I think" isn't a grammatical metaphor for "may", "should", or "it is >>> possible". But of course the whole post was a semantic metaphor for James' >>> statement that you cannot study language objectively and use it at the same >>> time. >>> >>> And semantics is the weak point of Saussure. The problem is that there >>> isn't anything "arbitraire" or conventional about semantics: to say that >>> semantics is arbitrary is essentially to say that thinking is arbitrary: >>> that there is no rational reason why we think of time as tense and entity >>> as number. It's not just that we can't think any other way; it's that we >>> have to grow crops and teach children in real time, and we have to gather >>> food and cook it in real numbers. >>> >>> Language is arbitrary (i.e. "subjective") at only one point: phonetics. >>> But even with phonetics (paradoxically the easiest to measure objectively) >>> you have to deal with the fact that humans make a finite number of sounds, >>> and only a small subset of these are maximally distinguishable at a >>> distance. That's why (another paradox) at the very time that Saussure was >>> developing a purely idealist, subjectivist study of language, teachers were >>> creating the international phonetic alphabet we still use today. It's a >>> menu, and menus suggest some element of choice. But choices can be >>> constrained, and contraints are always motivated. >>> >>> Having twelve months and three hundred and sixty five days a year only >>> seems "arbitrary" when you are not a farmer.If you were born in the pig >>> year (as I was) this is a particularly auspicious year, particularly if you >>> are completing your fifth complete cycle of twelve years (as I am). But the >>> reason why five cycles of twelve years is considered particularly >>> auspicious is no more arbitrary than the choice of the pig to name the >>> year: it's a likespan of sixty years, which in Confucian times was >>> considered just about ideal. >>> >>> David Kellogg >>> Sangmyung University >>> >>> New in *Language and Literature*, co-authored with Fang Li: >>> Mountains in labour: Eliot?s ?Atrocities? and Woolf?s >>> alternatives >>> Show all authors >>> >>> https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947018805660 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 2:45 PM Rein Raud wrote: >>> >>>> Happy New Year, David, >>>> >>>> Why do you say that (a) is absurd? Let us assume that this is what a >>>> scholar tells herself after a long internal thought-chain, weighing the >>>> pros and cons of a certain argument about how to study the human body, >>>> finally arriving at an unexpected conclusion, perhaps persuaded by someone >>>> else?s work. And at this point she says to herself ?Hey, come on, I don't >>>> really think we can study the human body objectively, do I?? >>>> >>>> ?Thinking something? (endorsing a particular claim) and ?thinking? >>>> (entertaining certain mental processes) are not the same thing, even though >>>> conflated in the English word ?think?. But in the first case you can >>>> substitute it with some synonyms (?reckon?, for example), while in others >>>> you cannot. You ask ?can you write "I don't think" without thinking?? but >>>> you probably wouldn?t ask ?can you write "I don't reckon" without >>>> reckoning?? >>>> >>>> Best wishes for 2019 to the whole community, >>>> >>>> Rein >>>> >>>> ********************************************** >>>> Rein Raud >>>> Professor of Asian and Cultural Studies, Tallinn University >>>> Uus-Sadama 5, Tallinn 10120 Estonia >>>> www.reinraud.com >>>> >>>> >>>> ?Meaning in Action: Outline of an Integral Theory of Culture?(Polity >>>> 2016) >>>> ?Practices of Selfhood? (with Zygmunt Bauman, Polity 2015) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1 Jan 2019, at 07:29, David Kellogg wrote: >>>> >>>> Suppose I say something like this: >>>> >>>> "I don't think we can study the human body objectively because we are >>>> already users of bodies when studying them, i.e. we must remain insiders of >>>> our bodies in order to study them, plus the fact that we have the will to >>>> embodiment, so to speak." >>>> >>>> I might be comfortable with a statement like this if I read through it >>>> quickly and I don't think about it for too long, provided I am in good >>>> health and don't require a doctor (If I fall seriously ill and I go to a >>>> doctor, and receive a statement like this, I will probably want a second >>>> opinion). >>>> >>>> But alas, I am arrested by the first three words. What does it mean to >>>> say "I don't think"? Can you write "I don't think" without thinking? Is >>>> this an instance of aphophasis, like "not to mention"? >>>> >>>> Because I do study language--and study it objectively--I know that "i >>>> don't think" is an interpersonal metaphor: it's a modal, a statement of >>>> probability, like the expression "cannot" (which is also a contradiction, >>>> when you think about it, because there isn't any such thing as negative >>>> probability). >>>> >>>> This is easy to prove. You just add a tag: >>>> >>>> a) "I don't think we can study the human body objectively, do I?" >>>> b) "I don't think we can study the human body objectively, can we?" >>>> >>>> It should be obvious that a) is absurd, and b) is what is meant. But >>>> isn't that an objective test? Or do you just mean that the phenomena of >>>> language don't appear under a microscope? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> David Kellogg >>>> Sangmyung University >>>> >>>> New in *Language and Literature*, co-authored with Fang Li: >>>> Mountains in labour: Eliot?s ?Atrocities? and Woolf?s >>>> alternatives >>>> Show all authors >>>> >>>> https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947018805660 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 4:52 AM James Ma wrote: >>>> >>>>> Andy, here're my thoughts with respect to your message: >>>>> >>>>> I think "default", as a state of the human mind, is intuitive and *a >>>>> posteriori* rather than of something we get hung up on deliberately >>>>> or voluntarily. This state of mind is also multifaceted, depending on the >>>>> context in which we find ourselves. Perhaps there might be a prototype of >>>>> default that is somehow intrinsic, but I'm not sure about that. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, Saussure's structuralism is profoundly influential, without which >>>>> post-Saussurean thought, including post-structuralism, wouldn't have >>>>> existed. Seemingly, none of these theorists could have worked out their >>>>> ideas without the inspiration and challenge of Saussure. Take for example >>>>> the Russian linguist Jakobson, which I think would suffice (never mind >>>>> those Francophone geniuses you might have referred to!). Jakobson extended >>>>> and modified Saussure's signs, using communicative functions as the object >>>>> of linguistic studies (instead of standardised rules of a given language, >>>>> i.e. *langue* in Saussure's terms). He replaced langue with "code" to >>>>> denote the goal-directedness of communicative functions. Each of the codes >>>>> was thus associated with its own langue as a larger system. >>>>> >>>>> It seems to me that Saussure's semiology is not simply dualistic. >>>>> There's more to it, e.g. the system of signification bridging between a >>>>> concept (signified) and a sound image (signifier). Strictly speaking, the >>>>> system of signification is not concerned with language but linguistics >>>>> within which language lends itself to scrutiny and related concepts become >>>>> valid. From Jakobson's viewpoint, this system is more than a normalised >>>>> collective norm; it contains personal meanings not necessarily compatible >>>>> with that norm. Saussure would say this norm is the *parole* that >>>>> involves an individual's preference and creativity. I find Jakobson's code >>>>> quite liberating - it helps explain the workings of Chinese dialects >>>>> (different to dialects within the British English), e.g. the grammatical >>>>> structure of Shanghainese, which is in many aspects at variance with >>>>> Mandarin (the official language or predominant dialect). >>>>> >>>>> By the way, I don't think we can study a language objectively because >>>>> we are already users of that language when studying it, i.e. we must remain >>>>> insiders of that language in order to study it, plus the fact that we have >>>>> the will to meaning, so to speak. >>>>> >>>>> James >>>>> *_______________________________________________________* >>>>> >>>>> *James Ma Independent Scholar * >>>>> *https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa >>>>> * >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 03:03, Andy Blunden wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Getting to your first topic, now, James ... >>>>>> >>>>>> I think it is inescapable for any of us, in everyday interactions, to >>>>>> "default" to the Saussurian way of seeing things, that is to say, signs as >>>>>> pointing to objects, in a structure of differences, abstracted from >>>>>> historical development. The structural view always gives us certain >>>>>> insights which can be invisible otherwise. But like a lot of things, in >>>>>> making this point, Saussure set up this dichotomy with himself on one side >>>>>> and condemned half a century of his followers in Structuralism to a >>>>>> one-sided view of the world ... which made the poststructuralists look like >>>>>> geniuses of course, when they stepped outside this cage >>>>>> >>>>>> What do you think? >>>>>> >>>>>> Andy >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>>>> On 21/12/2018 7:56 am, James Ma wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Andy, thank you for your message. Just to make a few brief points, >>>>>> linking with some of your comments: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> First, I have a default sense of signs based on Saussurean >>>>>> linguistics (semiology); however, I don't think I "strangely leap from >>>>>> Peirce's semiotics to Saussure's semiology". When I read Peirce and >>>>>> Vygotsky on signs, I often have a Saussurean imagery present in my mind. >>>>>> As I see it, Saussurean semiology is foundational to all language studies, >>>>>> such as the evolution of language in terms of e.g. semantic drift and >>>>>> narrowing. Speaking more broadly, in my view, both synchronic and >>>>>> diachronic approach to language have relevance for CHAT. Above all, *a >>>>>> priori *hermeneutic methodology can benefit further development of >>>>>> semiotic methodology within CHAT, helping us to come to grips with what Max >>>>>> Fisch, the key Peircean exponent, referred to as "the most essential >>>>>> point", i.e. the tripartite of thought as semiosis, namely >>>>>> sign-interpretation or sign action. For example, how sign action might be >>>>>> implicated in culture and consciousness. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190315/c434af21/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Fri Mar 15 02:29:50 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 20:29:50 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> Message-ID: <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> I am not a fan of Saussure myself, Arturo, partly because he established such a very un-Hegelian dichotomy with his Signifier and Signified. Such a view is fundamentally incompatible with Hegel's approach. However, you are correct that as early as 1817 Hegel supported the thesis of the arbitrariness of the sign, and he regarded sign-systems which included remnants of representation as underdeveloped, kind of 'second-rate'. Apart from that, what Hegel has to say about speech is mainly in the Subjective Spirit, as I am sure you know. but it is a pity that Hegel never developed his ideas about communication in general and speech and writing in particular into any kind of finished theory. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 15/03/2019 6:27 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: > Hi everyone. > > I just happen to read this old thread. > > It is my impression when I was doing my PhD and tried to > get around the notion of language and more into the notion > of speaking (or communication if you will) that De > Saussure actually was inspired in many ways by Hegel's > theory of systems when producing his categories of > langage/langue/parole. Furthermore, it seems than Hegel > anticipated many Saussurian ideas on the arbitrariness of > the linguistic sign, its relationship with concepts, and > writing systems in general. > > As you can clearly see when translating Vygotsky's Thought > and language/Thinking and speaking we struggle with > Saussurean terminology to convey what that "language" is. > > There are many passages of the Cours that match Hegel's > Encyclopedia. > > I could not address all these issues in my thesis and I > opted for deploying the notion of discourse instead of > speech. In that way I got rid of the notion of language as > system comprising all utterances (much or less as all > commodities form the market). However, I did not solve the > underlying issue of how abbreviation works in discourse > (or language). > > There are also many ontological problems with Vygotsky's > notion of interiorization and inner speech if we get rid > of a Saussurean understanding of language as system or > what linguists call a segregationist view of language > (language as a reified object that only makes sense within > an objectified system). > > Best, > > Arturo > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 at 02:04, James Ma > > wrote: > > Andy, this sounds?rather?unwise - I'm afraid your line > of argument is not entirely tenable. > I'll get back to you again when I have more time. > James > > */_______________________________________________________/* > > /*James Ma *Independent Scholar > //https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa > / > > > On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 at 22:54, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > It is clearly wrong to say that we can't study > language objectively because we exist and think in > it - in speech and writing, language is objective > and actual, so we can also observe it. But to > study language objectively, from "outside," > requires the student to acquire a certain distance > from it. Teaching grammar is one way of achieving > that, even writing too, I guess, and anyone who > learns a second language has a point from which to > view their first language. Thus we can learn that > "Je ne sais pas" is not necessarily a double > negative. But is the interviewer who asks an > artist to explain their painting failing to stand > outside language to see that there is something > else. Like the psychologists who ask subjects > questions and take the answer to be what the > person "really" thought. It's the old problem of > Kant's supposed "thing-in-itself" beyond > experience which (in my opinion) Hegel so > thoroughly debunked > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 2/01/2019 7:46 am, David Kellogg wrote: >> Happy new year to all, especially to all us happy >> pigs born in a pig year. >> >> Yes, "absurd" is too strong: it is possible to >> construct a context in which "I think" isn't a >> grammatical metaphor for "may", "should", or "it >> is possible". But of course the whole post was a >> semantic metaphor for James' statement that you >> cannot study language objectively and use it at >> the same time. >> >> And semantics is the weak point of Saussure. The >> problem is that there isn't anything "arbitraire" >> or conventional about semantics: to say that >> semantics is arbitrary is essentially to say that >> thinking is arbitrary: that there is no rational >> reason why we think of time as tense and entity >> as number. It's not just that we can't think any >> other way; it's that we have to grow crops and >> teach children in real time, and we have >> to?gather food and cook it in real numbers. >> >> Language is arbitrary (i.e. "subjective") at only >> one point:?phonetics. But even with phonetics >> (paradoxically the easiest to measure >> objectively) you have to deal with the fact that >> humans make a?finite number of sounds, and ?only >> a small subset of these?are maximally >> distinguishable at a distance. That's why >> (another paradox) at the very time that Saussure >> was developing a purely idealist, subjectivist >> study of language, teachers were creating the >> international phonetic alphabet we still use >> today. It's a menu, and menus suggest some >> element of choice. But choices can be >> constrained, and contraints are always?motivated. >> >> Having twelve months and three hundred and sixty >> five days a year only seems "arbitrary" when you >> are not a farmer.If you were born in the pig year >> (as I was) this is a particularly auspicious >> year, particularly if you are completing your >> fifth complete cycle of twelve years (as I am). >> But the reason why five cycles of twelve years is >> considered particularly auspicious is no >> more?arbitrary than the choice of the pig to name >> the year: it's a likespan of sixty years, which >> in Confucian times was considered just about ideal. >> >> David Kellogg >> Sangmyung University >> >> New in /Language and Literature/, co-authored >> with Fang Li: >> Mountains in labour: Eliot?s ?Atrocities? and >> Woolf?s alternatives >> Show all authors >> >> https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947018805660 >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 2:45 PM Rein Raud >> > wrote: >> >> Happy New Year, David, >> >> Why do you say that (a) is absurd? Let us >> assume that this is what a scholar tells >> herself after a long internal thought-chain, >> weighing the pros and cons of a certain >> argument about how to study the human body, >> finally arriving at an unexpected conclusion, >> perhaps persuaded by someone else?s work. And >> at this point she says to herself ?Hey, come >> on, I don't really think we can study the >> human body objectively, do I?? >> >> ?Thinking something? (endorsing a particular >> claim) and ?thinking? (entertaining certain >> mental processes) are not the same thing, >> even though conflated in the English word >> ?think?. But in the first case you can >> substitute it with some synonyms (?reckon?, >> for example), while in others you cannot. You >> ask ?can you write "I don't think" without >> thinking?? but you probably wouldn?t ask ?can >> you write "I don't reckon" without reckoning?? >> >> Best wishes for 2019 to the whole community, >> >> Rein >> >> ********************************************** >> Rein Raud >> Professor of Asian and Cultural >> Studies,?Tallinn University >> Uus-Sadama 5, Tallinn 10120 Estonia >> www.reinraud.com >> >> >> ?Meaning in Action: Outline of an >> Integral?Theory of Culture?(Polity 2016) >> >> ?Practices of Selfhood? (with Zygmunt?Bauman, >> Polity 2015) >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 1 Jan 2019, at 07:29, David Kellogg >>> >> > wrote: >>> >>> Suppose I say something like this: >>> >>> "I don't think we can study the human body >>> objectively because we are already users of >>> bodies when studying them, i.e. we must >>> remain insiders of our bodies?in order to >>> study them, plus the fact that we have the >>> will to embodiment, so to speak." >>> >>> I might be comfortable with a statement like >>> this if I read through it quickly and I >>> don't think about it for too long, provided >>> I am in good health and don't require a >>> doctor (If I fall seriously?ill and I go to >>> a doctor, and receive a statement like this, >>> I will probably want a second opinion). >>> >>> But alas,?I am arrested by the first three >>> words. What does it mean to say "I don't >>> think"? Can you write "I don't think" >>> without thinking??Is this an instance of >>> aphophasis, like "not to mention"? >>> >>> Because ?I do study language--and study it >>> objectively--I know that "i don't think" is >>> an interpersonal metaphor: it's a modal, a >>> statement of probability, like the >>> expression "cannot" (which is also a >>> contradiction, when you think about it, >>> because there isn't any such thing >>> as?negative probability). >>> >>> This is easy to prove. You just add a tag: >>> >>> a) "I don't think we can study the human >>> body objectively, do I?" >>> b) "I don't think we can study the human >>> body objectively, can we?" >>> >>> It should be obvious that a) is absurd, and >>> b) is what is meant. But isn't that an >>> objective test? Or do you just mean that the >>> phenomena of language don't appear under a >>> microscope? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> David Kellogg >>> Sangmyung University >>> >>> New in /Language and Literature/, >>> co-authored with Fang Li: >>> Mountains in labour: Eliot?s ?Atrocities? >>> and Woolf?s alternatives >>> Show all authors >>> >>> https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947018805660 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 4:52 AM James Ma >>> >> > wrote: >>> >>> Andy, here're my thoughts with respect >>> to your message: >>> >>> I think "default", as a state of the >>> human mind, is intuitive and /a >>> posteriori/ rather than of something we >>> get hung up on deliberately or >>> voluntarily. This state of mind is also >>> multifaceted, depending on the context >>> in which we find ourselves. Perhaps >>> there might be?a prototype of default >>> that is somehow intrinsic, but I'm not >>> sure about that. >>> >>> Yes, Saussure's structuralism is >>> profoundly influential, without which >>> post-Saussurean thought, including >>> post-structuralism, wouldn't have >>> existed. Seemingly, none of these >>> theorists could have worked out their >>> ideas without the inspiration and >>> challenge of Saussure. Take for example >>> the Russian linguist Jakobson, which I >>> think would suffice (never mind those >>> Francophone geniuses you might have >>> referred to!). Jakobson extended and >>> modified Saussure's signs, using >>> communicative functions as the object of >>> linguistic studies (instead of >>> standardised rules of a given language, >>> i.e. /langue/ in Saussure's terms). He >>> replaced langue with "code" to denote >>> the goal-directedness of communicative >>> functions. Each of the codes was thus >>> associated with its own langue as a >>> larger system. >>> >>> It seems to me that Saussure's semiology >>> is not simply dualistic. There's more to >>> it, e.g. the system of signification >>> bridging between a concept (signified) >>> and a sound image (signifier). Strictly >>> speaking, the system of signification is >>> not concerned with language but >>> linguistics within which language lends >>> itself to?scrutiny?and related >>> concepts?become valid. From Jakobson's >>> viewpoint, this system is more than a >>> normalised collective norm; it contains >>> personal meanings not necessarily >>> compatible with that norm. Saussure >>> would say this norm is the /parole/ that >>> involves an individual's preference and >>> creativity. I find Jakobson's code quite >>> liberating - it helps?explain the >>> workings of Chinese dialects (different >>> to dialects within the British English), >>> e.g. the grammatical structure of >>> Shanghainese, which is in many aspects >>> at variance with Mandarin (the official >>> language or predominant dialect). >>> >>> By the way, I don't think we can study a >>> language objectively because we are >>> already users of that language when >>> studying it, i.e. we must remain >>> insiders of that language in order to >>> study it, plus the fact that we have the >>> will to meaning, so to speak. >>> >>> James >>> */_______________________________________________________/* >>> >>> /*James Ma *Independent Scholar >>> //https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa >>> / >>> >>> >>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 03:03, Andy >>> Blunden >> > wrote: >>> >>> Getting to your first topic, now, >>> James ... >>> >>> I think it is inescapable for any of >>> us, in everyday interactions, to >>> "default" to the Saussurian way of >>> seeing things, that is to say, signs >>> as pointing to objects, in a >>> structure of differences, abstracted >>> from historical development. The >>> structural view always gives us >>> certain insights which can be >>> invisible otherwise. But like a lot >>> of things, in making this point, >>> Saussure set up this dichotomy with >>> himself on one side and condemned >>> half a century of his followers in >>> Structuralism to a one-sided view of >>> the world ... which made the >>> poststructuralists look like >>> geniuses of course, when they >>> stepped outside this cage >>> >>> What do you? think? >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> >>> On 21/12/2018 7:56 am, James Ma wrote: >>>> >>>> Andy, thank you for your message. >>>> Just to make a few brief?points, >>>> linking with some of your comments: >>>> >>>> >>>> First, I have a default sense of >>>> signs based on Saussurean >>>> linguistics (semiology); however, I >>>> don't think I "strangely leap from >>>> Peirce's semiotics to Saussure's >>>> semiology". When I read Peirce and >>>> Vygotsky on signs, I often have a >>>> Saussurean imagery present in my >>>> mind.? As I see it, Saussurean >>>> semiology is foundational to all >>>> language studies, such as the >>>> evolution of language in terms of >>>> e.g. semantic drift and narrowing. >>>> Speaking more broadly, in my view, >>>> both synchronic and diachronic >>>> approach to language?have relevance >>>> for CHAT.? Above all, /a priori >>>> /hermeneutic methodology can >>>> benefit further development of >>>> semiotic methodology within CHAT, >>>> helping us to come to grips with >>>> what Max Fisch, the key Peircean >>>> exponent, referred to as "the most >>>> essential point", i.e. the >>>> tripartite of thought as semiosis, >>>> namely sign-interpretation or sign >>>> action.? For example, how sign >>>> action might be implicated in >>>> culture and consciousness. >>>> >>>> >>>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190315/89c61a9d/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Fri Mar 15 04:56:11 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 22:56:11 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Indigenous Australian English Message-ID: <07295b2d-b942-74fa-e626-c27929ead2a5@marxists.org> While we have the attention of some linguists .... Indigenous Australians have a way of using certain specific words, for example, country, culture, language, community, which in English we usually use with a personal pronoun, as in "I can speak your language," or article, "is this the country you come from?" as if they were countable nouns, but which Indigenous Australians use without an article or personal pronoun, as in "I went to country" or "when I speak language ...," much like the word "home" which can be used without the "my" or "your." This usage conveys a meaning which is generally understood, but is used only in relation to the Indigenous people. I understand it. But I find it hard to put into words what is actually being done when words are used like this. I use words like "science" or "religion" in the same way, I guess. What does it mean linguistically?? Andy -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190315/0db6d385/attachment.html From dkellogg60@gmail.com Fri Mar 15 05:34:27 2019 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 21:34:27 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Indigenous Australian English In-Reply-To: <07295b2d-b942-74fa-e626-c27929ead2a5@marxists.org> References: <07295b2d-b942-74fa-e626-c27929ead2a5@marxists.org> Message-ID: I think it means that Australians are leading the way into a future without articles. Actually, very few languages use an article system; as you know, Russian does not, and neither does Chinese, Korean, Tibetan or Turkish. As you point out, English doesn't always use articles either. When we embed singular nouns in prepositional phrases, the use of the article tends to depend on the meaning. Compare "in the morning" with "at night", or "at weekend" with "over the the weekend", "down town" with "down the street", etc. The usual analysis is that "at night" functions mostly as an adverb ("nightwise") while "in the morning" is a minor verb (i.e. a verb with no subject but an object). "I go home", "I speak language" and "I spent two weeks in hospital/jail/church" can be analyzed in much the same way. I find it useful to think of articles as part of a whole range of prenominal modifiers that go from deictic to defining. So for example when my student writes "My mom had to have an urgent C-section surgical operation" the "an" part is maximally orienting but minimally defining (it just means I am orienting towards it as an instance of something but it doesn't say what it's an instance of), the "urgent" part is somewhat less orienting and more defining, the "C-section" part is classifying, and therefore more defining still, until we come to the part that is maximally defining and minimally orienting, "operation". Not only nominal groups but verbal groups obey this rule ("had to have", where "had" is tensed because it is orienting and locates the speaker in time but "to have" is untensed and simply defines the nature of the process). Whole clauses can also be seen this way ("My mom" is the deictic part of the clause and "operation" is the defining part). Not all languages do this, because not all languages need to. So for example Russian doesn't require this kind of rigid order. Because of those pesky cases, so hard for Russian students to master, it is always clear who does what to whom by what means, and the order simply doesn't matter. Same is true in Latin. This is why I think you miss the point a little when you speak of "a perizhivanie" vs. "perizhivanie". That's not how you think in Russian. dk David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 8:57 PM Andy Blunden wrote: > While we have the attention of some linguists .... Indigenous Australians > have a way of using certain specific words, for example, country, culture, > language, community, which in English we usually use with a personal > pronoun, as in "I can speak your language," or article, "is this the > country you come from?" as if they were countable nouns, but which > Indigenous Australians use without an article or personal pronoun, as in "I > went to country" or "when I speak language ...," much like the word "home" > which can be used without the "my" or "your." > > This usage conveys a meaning which is generally understood, but is used > only in relation to the Indigenous people. I understand it. But I find it > hard to put into words what is actually being done when words are used like > this. I use words like "science" or "religion" in the same way, I guess. > What does it mean linguistically?? > > Andy > -- > ------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190315/e11d665a/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Fri Mar 15 05:53:13 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 23:53:13 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Indigenous Australian English In-Reply-To: References: <07295b2d-b942-74fa-e626-c27929ead2a5@marxists.org> Message-ID: Mmm, but this is not a speech style applied across the board (like a distinctive accent, or never using the accusative case). It is used only for certain words, so the structural principle of difference applies. These specific words are given an elevated meaning by marking them with the /different/ usage, and kind of take on the meaning of a /principle/, rather than a thing or place, etc these As to /perezhivanie/, of course, it is not an issue for Russian speakers speaking Russian. The problem comes up when a Russian uses a Russian word in an English sentence and how an English speaker hears that, Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 15/03/2019 11:34 pm, David Kellogg wrote: > I think it means that Australians are leading the way into > a future without articles. Actually, very few languages > use an article system; as you know, Russian does not, and > neither does Chinese, Korean, Tibetan or Turkish. > > As you point out, English doesn't always use articles > either. When we embed singular nouns in prepositional > phrases, the use of the article tends to depend on the > meaning. Compare "in the morning" with "at night", or "at > weekend" with "over the the weekend", "down town" with > "down the street", etc. The usual analysis is that "at > night" functions mostly as an adverb ("nightwise") while > "in the morning" is a minor verb (i.e. a verb with no > subject but an object). "I go home", "I speak language" > and "I spent two weeks in hospital/jail/church" can be > analyzed in much the same way. > > I find it useful to think of articles as part of a whole > range of prenominal modifiers that go from deictic to > defining. So for example when my student writes "My mom > had to have an urgent?C-section surgical operation" the > "an" part is maximally?orienting but minimally defining > (it just means?I am orienting towards it as an?instance of > something but it doesn't say what it's an instance of), > the "urgent" part is somewhat?less orienting and more > defining, the "C-section"?part is classifying, and > therefore more defining?still, until we come to the part > that is maximally defining and minimally orienting, > "operation".?Not only nominal groups but verbal groups > obey this rule?("had to have", where "had" is tensed > because it is orienting and locates the speaker in time > but "to have" is untensed and simply defines the nature of > the process). Whole clauses can also be seen this way ("My > mom" is the deictic part of the clause?and "operation" is > the defining part). > > Not all languages do this, because not all languages need > to. So for example Russian doesn't require this kind of > rigid order. Because of those pesky cases, so hard > for?Russian students to master, it is always clear > who?does what to whom by what means, and the order simply > doesn't matter. Same is true in Latin. This is why I think > you miss the point a little when you speak of "a > perizhivanie" vs. "perizhivanie". That's not how you think > in Russian. > > dk > > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S > ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND > ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, > British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: > 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > Some e-prints available at: > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 8:57 PM Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > While we have the attention of some linguists .... > Indigenous Australians have a way of using certain > specific words, for example, country, culture, > language, community, which in English we usually use > with a personal pronoun, as in "I can speak your > language," or article, "is this the country you come > from?" as if they were countable nouns, but which > Indigenous Australians use without an article or > personal pronoun, as in "I went to country" or "when I > speak language ...," much like the word "home" which > can be used without the "my" or "your." > > This usage conveys a meaning which is generally > understood, but is used only in relation to the > Indigenous people. I understand it. But I find it hard > to put into words what is actually being done when > words are used like this. I use words like "science" > or "religion" in the same way, I guess. What does it > mean linguistically?? > > Andy > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190315/f8b71ad2/attachment.html From nickrenz@uchicago.edu Fri Mar 15 05:56:37 2019 From: nickrenz@uchicago.edu (Elizabeth Fein) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 08:56:37 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Indigenous Australian English In-Reply-To: References: <07295b2d-b942-74fa-e626-c27929ead2a5@marxists.org> Message-ID: This conversation is also making me think of a recently emerging option at least in English vernacular (I don't know if this is showing up in other languages): dropping the preposition "of" before an abstract noun in order to emphasize the authoritative power of the concept itself in the absence of any specific manifestation. (i.e. "...because *science*" or "because *reasons*"). This is a bit different of course because it is a deliberate grammatical modification to an existing form that calls attention to itself as such. Best, Elizabeth On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 8:37 AM David Kellogg wrote: > I think it means that Australians are leading the way into a future > without articles. Actually, very few languages use an article system; as > you know, Russian does not, and neither does Chinese, Korean, Tibetan or > Turkish. > > As you point out, English doesn't always use articles either. When we > embed singular nouns in prepositional phrases, the use of the article tends > to depend on the meaning. Compare "in the morning" with "at night", or "at > weekend" with "over the the weekend", "down town" with "down the street", > etc. The usual analysis is that "at night" functions mostly as an adverb > ("nightwise") while "in the morning" is a minor verb (i.e. a verb with no > subject but an object). "I go home", "I speak language" and "I spent two > weeks in hospital/jail/church" can be analyzed in much the same way. > > I find it useful to think of articles as part of a whole range of > prenominal modifiers that go from deictic to defining. So for example when > my student writes "My mom had to have an urgent C-section surgical > operation" the "an" part is maximally orienting but minimally defining (it > just means I am orienting towards it as an instance of something but it > doesn't say what it's an instance of), the "urgent" part is somewhat less > orienting and more defining, the "C-section" part is classifying, and > therefore more defining still, until we come to the part that is maximally > defining and minimally orienting, "operation". Not only nominal groups but > verbal groups obey this rule ("had to have", where "had" is tensed because > it is orienting and locates the speaker in time but "to have" is untensed > and simply defines the nature of the process). Whole clauses can also be > seen this way ("My mom" is the deictic part of the clause and "operation" > is the defining part). > > Not all languages do this, because not all languages need to. So for > example Russian doesn't require this kind of rigid order. Because of those > pesky cases, so hard for Russian students to master, it is always clear > who does what to whom by what means, and the order simply doesn't matter. > Same is true in Latin. This is why I think you miss the point a little when > you speak of "a perizhivanie" vs. "perizhivanie". That's not how you think > in Russian. > > dk > > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S > ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE > WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational > Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > Some e-prints available at: > > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 8:57 PM Andy Blunden wrote: > >> While we have the attention of some linguists .... Indigenous Australians >> have a way of using certain specific words, for example, country, culture, >> language, community, which in English we usually use with a personal >> pronoun, as in "I can speak your language," or article, "is this the >> country you come from?" as if they were countable nouns, but which >> Indigenous Australians use without an article or personal pronoun, as in "I >> went to country" or "when I speak language ...," much like the word "home" >> which can be used without the "my" or "your." >> >> This usage conveys a meaning which is generally understood, but is used >> only in relation to the Indigenous people. I understand it. But I find it >> hard to put into words what is actually being done when words are used like >> this. I use words like "science" or "religion" in the same way, I guess. >> What does it mean linguistically?? >> >> Andy >> -- >> ------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190315/fed6837c/attachment.html From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Fri Mar 15 16:34:56 2019 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:34:56 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Indigenous Australian English In-Reply-To: References: <07295b2d-b942-74fa-e626-c27929ead2a5@marxists.org> Message-ID: Andy, Not sure if this gets at what you're describing but Whorf deals quite extensively with the tendency of English to make processes into things. His classic piece on this addresses the way that English (speakers) can turn processes like lightning or waves or even time itself into countable nouns and how this might affect the way that we understand the world around us (esp. time). Really fascinating stuff and not unrelated to Vygotsky's idea of semiotic mediation (as an old paper by John Lucy pointed out a long time ago). I wish I knew more about the aboriginal Australian languages and could point more toward the kinds of things that you are talking about but I'm no linguist and most of what I know are restricted to the differences in directional terms as compared to English - cardinal vs. relative (and I happened to be teaching this two days ago - or should I say "two nights have passed since I taught this"). Cheers, greg On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 7:00 AM Elizabeth Fein wrote: > This conversation is also making me think of a recently emerging option at > least in English vernacular (I don't know if this is showing up in other > languages): dropping the preposition "of" before an abstract noun in order > to emphasize the authoritative power of the concept itself in the absence > of any specific manifestation. (i.e. "...because *science*" or "because > *reasons*"). This is a bit different of course because it is a deliberate > grammatical modification to an existing form that calls attention to itself > as such. > > Best, > Elizabeth > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 8:37 AM David Kellogg > wrote: > >> I think it means that Australians are leading the way into a future >> without articles. Actually, very few languages use an article system; as >> you know, Russian does not, and neither does Chinese, Korean, Tibetan or >> Turkish. >> >> As you point out, English doesn't always use articles either. When we >> embed singular nouns in prepositional phrases, the use of the article tends >> to depend on the meaning. Compare "in the morning" with "at night", or "at >> weekend" with "over the the weekend", "down town" with "down the street", >> etc. The usual analysis is that "at night" functions mostly as an adverb >> ("nightwise") while "in the morning" is a minor verb (i.e. a verb with no >> subject but an object). "I go home", "I speak language" and "I spent two >> weeks in hospital/jail/church" can be analyzed in much the same way. >> >> I find it useful to think of articles as part of a whole range of >> prenominal modifiers that go from deictic to defining. So for example when >> my student writes "My mom had to have an urgent C-section surgical >> operation" the "an" part is maximally orienting but minimally defining (it >> just means I am orienting towards it as an instance of something but it >> doesn't say what it's an instance of), the "urgent" part is somewhat less >> orienting and more defining, the "C-section" part is classifying, and >> therefore more defining still, until we come to the part that is maximally >> defining and minimally orienting, "operation". Not only nominal groups but >> verbal groups obey this rule ("had to have", where "had" is tensed because >> it is orienting and locates the speaker in time but "to have" is untensed >> and simply defines the nature of the process). Whole clauses can also be >> seen this way ("My mom" is the deictic part of the clause and "operation" >> is the defining part). >> >> Not all languages do this, because not all languages need to. So for >> example Russian doesn't require this kind of rigid order. Because of those >> pesky cases, so hard for Russian students to master, it is always clear >> who does what to whom by what means, and the order simply doesn't matter. >> Same is true in Latin. This is why I think you miss the point a little when >> you speak of "a perizhivanie" vs. "perizhivanie". That's not how you think >> in Russian. >> >> dk >> >> >> David Kellogg >> Sangmyung University >> >> New Article; >> >> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S >> ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE >> WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational >> Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> >> >> Some e-prints available at: >> >> >> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 8:57 PM Andy Blunden wrote: >> >>> While we have the attention of some linguists .... Indigenous >>> Australians have a way of using certain specific words, for example, >>> country, culture, language, community, which in English we usually use with >>> a personal pronoun, as in "I can speak your language," or article, "is this >>> the country you come from?" as if they were countable nouns, but which >>> Indigenous Australians use without an article or personal pronoun, as in "I >>> went to country" or "when I speak language ...," much like the word "home" >>> which can be used without the "my" or "your." >>> >>> This usage conveys a meaning which is generally understood, but is used >>> only in relation to the Indigenous people. I understand it. But I find it >>> hard to put into words what is actually being done when words are used like >>> this. I use words like "science" or "religion" in the same way, I guess. >>> What does it mean linguistically?? >>> >>> Andy >>> -- >>> ------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> >> -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190315/a0dcdcd9/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Fri Mar 15 17:21:25 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 11:21:25 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Indigenous Australian English In-Reply-To: References: <07295b2d-b942-74fa-e626-c27929ead2a5@marxists.org> Message-ID: I think Elizabeth's message was to the point. Thanks Elizabeth, Greg, it is not about Aboriginal languages. It is an innovation which indigenous people have introduced into English and is limited to a small range of concepts and which, as Elizabeth says,"emphasise the authoritative power of the concept itself." Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 16/03/2019 10:34 am, Greg Thompson wrote: > Andy, > > Not sure if this gets at what you're describing but Whorf > deals quite extensively with the tendency of English to > make processes into things. His classic piece on this > addresses the way that English (speakers) can turn > processes like lightning or waves or even time itself into > countable nouns and how this might affect the way that we > understand the world around us (esp. time). Really > fascinating stuff and not unrelated to Vygotsky's idea of > semiotic mediation (as an old paper by John Lucy pointed > out a long time ago). > > I wish I knew more about the aboriginal Australian > languages and could point more toward the kinds of things > that you are talking about but I'm no linguist and most of > what I know are restricted to the differences in > directional terms as compared to English - cardinal vs. > relative (and I happened to be teaching this two days ago > - or should I say "two nights have passed since I taught > this"). > > Cheers, > greg > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 7:00 AM Elizabeth Fein > > wrote: > > This conversation is also making me think of a > recently emerging option at least in English > vernacular (I don't know if this is showing up in > other languages): dropping the preposition "of" before > an abstract noun in order to emphasize the > authoritative power of the concept itself in the > absence of any specific manifestation.? (i.e. > "...because /science/" or "because /reasons/"). This > is a bit different of course because it is a > deliberate grammatical modification to an existing > form that calls attention to itself as such. > > Best, > Elizabeth > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 8:37 AM David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > I think it means that Australians are leading the > way into a future without articles. Actually, very > few languages use an article system; as you know, > Russian does not, and neither does Chinese, > Korean, Tibetan or Turkish. > > As you point out, English doesn't always use > articles either. When we embed singular nouns in > prepositional phrases, the use of the article > tends to depend on the meaning. Compare "in the > morning" with "at night", or "at weekend" with > "over the the weekend", "down town" with "down the > street", etc. The usual analysis is that "at > night" functions mostly as an adverb ("nightwise") > while "in the morning" is a minor verb (i.e. a > verb with no subject but an object). "I go home", > "I speak language" and "I spent two weeks in > hospital/jail/church" can be analyzed in much the > same way. > > I find it useful to think of articles as part of a > whole range of prenominal modifiers that go from > deictic to defining. So for example when my > student writes "My mom had to have an > urgent?C-section surgical operation" the "an" part > is maximally?orienting but minimally defining (it > just means?I am orienting towards it as > an?instance of something but it doesn't say what > it's an instance of), the "urgent" part is > somewhat?less orienting and more defining, the > "C-section"?part is classifying, and therefore > more defining?still, until we come to the part > that is maximally defining and minimally > orienting, "operation".?Not only nominal groups > but verbal groups obey this rule?("had to have", > where "had" is tensed because it is orienting and > locates the speaker in time but "to have" is > untensed and simply defines the nature of the > process). Whole clauses can also be seen this way > ("My mom" is the deictic part of the clause?and > "operation" is the defining part). > > Not all languages do this, because not all > languages need to. So for example Russian doesn't > require this kind of rigid order. Because of those > pesky cases, so hard for?Russian students to > master, it is always clear who?does what to whom > by what means, and the order simply doesn't > matter. Same is true in Latin. This is why I think > you miss the point a little when you speak of "a > perizhivanie" vs. "perizhivanie". That's not how > you think in Russian. > > dk > > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: > VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL > DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES > OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational > Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > Some e-prints available at: > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 8:57 PM Andy Blunden > > > wrote: > > While we have the attention of some linguists > .... Indigenous Australians have a way of > using certain specific words, for example, > country, culture, language, community, which > in English we usually use with a personal > pronoun, as in "I can speak your language," or > article, "is this the country you come from?" > as if they were countable nouns, but which > Indigenous Australians use without an article > or personal pronoun, as in "I went to country" > or "when I speak language ...," much like the > word "home" which can be used without the "my" > or "your." > > This usage conveys a meaning which is > generally understood, but is used only in > relation to the Indigenous people. I > understand it. But I find it hard to put into > words what is actually being done when words > are used like this. I use words like "science" > or "religion" in the same way, I guess. What > does it mean linguistically?? > > Andy > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190316/381b95a6/attachment.html From arturo.escandon@gmail.com Fri Mar 15 20:54:59 2019 From: arturo.escandon@gmail.com (Arturo Escandon) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 12:54:59 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> Message-ID: Thanks Andy and David for your insights. As you say, Andy, the dichotomy signifier-signified is not very Hegelian to say the least. In my opinion, just by reading the Cours, I can tell Saussure started with some kind of Hegelian approach but, because he did not capture the real dimension of dialectics, ended up producing shell-like categories, shortcuts of Hegelian theory. The same applies to Durkheim and the rest of structuralists. David, I did not know who the actual source of the segregationist/integrationist categories was. I had a laugh with your comment on Harris placing himself among the integrationists. Anyway, I think there is some research opportunity here about making more precise observations of what constitutes speech or communication in our tradition. 'Word meaning" for instance, should not be rendered as 'utterance meaning' in English? What is 'word'? Or its use it's just fine as word allows us to establish a relation between more objetive and less objective forms of communication. In that case 'word' serves the purpose of keeping intact the process dimension of meaning making. I am more familiar with Bakhtin and Akhutina views on theories of communication and their discussion on Saussure, yet I abandoned such subtleties a decade ago, so it was nice to be reminded of how the scheletons of modern lingustics still play a big part in our own imaginary. Akhutina, T.V., 2003. The theory of verbal communication in the works of M.M. Bakhtin and L.S. Vygotsky, Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 41, pp. 94-114. Best Arturo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190316/21ef5624/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Fri Mar 15 21:05:01 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 15:05:01 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> Message-ID: Arturo, I think Vygotsky and Bakhtin have two distinct units of analysis here, and both give us a specific insight which the other does not. "Word" in the sense Vygotsky is using it in Chapter 1 of T&S is inclusive of any phrase or word which is the sign for a concept. "Utterance" for Bakhtin is a turn in dialogue, i.e., a move in a language game (to use Wittgenstein's term for the same entity). The utterance does not tell us anything about the concepts being evoked. "Word meaning" does not tell us how it figures in a language game, and therefore does not tell us about the relations of subordination or solidarity, etc., being produced. That's how I see it, anyway. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 16/03/2019 2:54 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: > Word meaning" for instance, should not be rendered as > 'utterance meaning' in English? What is 'word'? Or its use > it's just fine as word -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190316/794af5b9/attachment.html From arturo.escandon@gmail.com Fri Mar 15 23:42:19 2019 From: arturo.escandon@gmail.com (Arturo Escandon) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 15:42:19 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> Message-ID: Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. Best Arturo -- Sent from Gmail Mobile -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190316/e8340390/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Sat Mar 16 01:11:55 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 19:11:55 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> Message-ID: <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> I would? have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: > Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. > > Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their > complementariness: > > The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the > utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in > itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks > and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason > and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance > develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and > progresses through inner speech to external speech. The > prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner > word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external > speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the > comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I > attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant > for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major > building material for speech production is the living > two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the > utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying > personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, > the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the > utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, > and consciousness. > > Best > > Arturo > > > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190316/5b551bfc/attachment.html From hshonerd@gmail.com Sat Mar 16 13:15:38 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 14:15:38 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> Message-ID: <95F73C2C-F936-45BE-BCD3-71ADF2985735@gmail.com> This is definitely great stuff, mates! Lurking Turkey > On Mar 16, 2019, at 2:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. > > The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: > > https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf > Andy > > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >> >> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >> >> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >> >> Best >> >> Arturo >> >> >> -- >> Sent from Gmail Mobile -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190316/696ae12d/attachment.html From hshonerd@gmail.com Sat Mar 16 16:02:29 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 17:02:29 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Sarcastic Fringehead Message-ID: <5EC710FE-0F1C-464A-A555-A108FE707C4C@gmail.com> So sorry if this seems silly, but I was wondering how many of you chatters knew about the sarcastic fringehead. I confess that until watching an episode of of the Life series on Netflix about fish, I didn?t know that it was legal to use ?sarcastic? in naming a fish. You couldn?t invent it. I have linked you to a youtube video of sarcastic fringehead ?culture?. A sort of meme for of how fish could prefigure American politics. Most fish aren?t so crabby, but maybe it?s what makes us special. Note the orange hue in the opening scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjexNXJYblQ . Henry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190316/ad5c4429/attachment.html From mcole@ucsd.edu Sat Mar 16 16:15:09 2019 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 16:15:09 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sarcastic Fringehead In-Reply-To: <5EC710FE-0F1C-464A-A555-A108FE707C4C@gmail.com> References: <5EC710FE-0F1C-464A-A555-A108FE707C4C@gmail.com> Message-ID: A simplified version of Game of Thrones, Henry? Thanks for sharing, as they say. mike On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM HENRY SHONERD wrote: > So sorry if this seems silly, but I was wondering how many of you chatters > knew about the sarcastic fringehead. I confess that until watching an > episode of of the Life series on Netflix about fish, I didn?t know that it > was legal to use ?sarcastic? in naming a fish. You couldn?t invent it. I > have linked you to a youtube video of sarcastic fringehead ?culture?. A > sort of meme for of how fish could prefigure American politics. Most fish > aren?t so crabby, but maybe it?s what makes us special. Note the orange hue > in the opening scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjexNXJYblQ. > Henry > -- Who says development is not a life long process has either not lived long enough, or has lived too long. Anon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190316/b96c3f40/attachment.html From a.j.gil@ils.uio.no Sun Mar 17 00:00:57 2019 From: a.j.gil@ils.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 07:00:57 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sarcastic Fringehead In-Reply-To: References: <5EC710FE-0F1C-464A-A555-A108FE707C4C@gmail.com>, Message-ID: <1552806057585.20286@ils.uio.no> Yes, the bully-like behaviour, orange hue etc. looks familiar. But it seems to me that this is quite a misnomer, as sarcasm and irony are way more refined and sophisticated than the type of displays (and circus) that we get to see in politics these days. Unfortunately, I am afraid that the greed and wickedness that characterises what goes on behind the scenes of show politics is far removed from the noble, honest territorial behaviour these fish display... Alfredo ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: 17 March 2019 00:15 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sarcastic Fringehead A simplified version of Game of Thrones, Henry? Thanks for sharing, as they say. mike On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM HENRY SHONERD > wrote: So sorry if this seems silly, but I was wondering how many of you chatters knew about the sarcastic fringehead. I confess that until watching an episode of of the Life series on Netflix about fish, I didn't know that it was legal to use "sarcastic" in naming a fish. You couldn't invent it. I have linked you to a youtube video of sarcastic fringehead "culture". A sort of meme for of how fish could prefigure American politics. Most fish aren't so crabby, but maybe it's what makes us special. Note the orange hue in the opening scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjexNXJYblQ. Henry -- Who says development is not a life long process has either not lived long enough, or has lived too long. Anon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/686b5d04/attachment.html From jamesma320@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 01:09:07 2019 From: jamesma320@gmail.com (James Ma) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 08:09:07 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sarcastic Fringehead In-Reply-To: <1552806057585.20286@ils.uio.no> References: <5EC710FE-0F1C-464A-A555-A108FE707C4C@gmail.com> <1552806057585.20286@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: Perhaps something could be worked out in length and sent to the Private Eye magazine! (I'm always interested to see the social psychology of politics in the Western world.) James Alfredo Jornet Gil ? 2019?3?17??? 07:04??? > Yes, the bully-like behaviour, orange hue etc. looks familiar. But it > seems to me that this is quite a misnomer, as sarcasm and irony are way > more refined and sophisticated than the type of displays (and circus) > that we get to see in politics these days. Unfortunately, I am afraid that > the greed and wickedness that characterises what goes on behind the scenes > of show politics is far removed from the noble, honest territorial > behaviour these fish display... > > Alfredo > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > *Sent:* 17 March 2019 00:15 > *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Sarcastic Fringehead > > A simplified version of Game of Thrones, Henry? > Thanks for sharing, as they say. > mike > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM HENRY SHONERD wrote: > >> So sorry if this seems silly, but I was wondering how many of you >> chatters knew about the sarcastic fringehead. I confess that until watching >> an episode of of the Life series on Netflix about fish, I didn?t know that >> it was legal to use ?sarcastic? in naming a fish. You couldn?t invent it. I >> have linked you to a youtube video of sarcastic fringehead ?culture?. A >> sort of meme for of how fish could prefigure American politics. Most fish >> aren?t so crabby, but maybe it?s what makes us special. Note the orange hue >> in the opening scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjexNXJYblQ. >> Henry >> > > > -- > Who says development is not a life long process has either not lived long > enough, or has lived too long. > Anon > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/174443a0/attachment.html From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Sun Mar 17 02:06:24 2019 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (Haydi Zulfei) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 09:06:24 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sarcastic Fringehead In-Reply-To: References: <5EC710FE-0F1C-464A-A555-A108FE707C4C@gmail.com> <1552806057585.20286@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: <1239806810.10105340.1552813584249@mail.yahoo.com> Hello All,For the just ones!Please delete the attached unread!Haydi On Sunday, March 17, 2019, 11:41:49 AM GMT+3:30, James Ma wrote: Perhaps something could be worked out in length and sent to the Private Eye magazine! (I'm always interested to see the social psychology of politics in the Western world.) James Alfredo Jornet Gil ? 2019?3?17??? 07:04??? Yes, the bully-like behaviour,?orange hue etc. looks familiar. But it seems to me that this is quite a misnomer, as?sarcasm and irony are?way more refined and sophisticated than the type of displays?(and circus) that?we get to see in politics these days. Unfortunately, I am afraid that the greed and wickedness that characterises what goes on behind the scenes of show politics?is far removed from the noble, honest?territorial behaviour these fish display... Alfredo From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: 17 March 2019 00:15 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sarcastic Fringehead?A simplified version of Game of Thrones, Henry??Thanks for sharing, as they say.mike On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM HENRY SHONERD wrote: So sorry if this seems silly, but I was wondering how many of you chatters knew about the sarcastic fringehead. I confess that until watching an episode of of the Life series on Netflix about fish, I didn?t know that it was legal to use ?sarcastic? in naming a fish. You couldn?t invent it. I have linked you to a youtube video of sarcastic fringehead ?culture?. A sort of meme for of how fish could prefigure American politics. Most fish aren?t so crabby, but maybe it?s what makes us special. Note the orange hue in the opening scene:?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjexNXJYblQ.?Henry -- Who says development is not a life long process has either not lived long enough, or has lived too long. Anon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/10b49062/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ARTURO ESCANDO Hi everyone_merged4_merged2.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1118809 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/10b49062/attachment-0001.pdf From helenaworthen@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 08:55:53 2019 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 08:55:53 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> Message-ID: <5AD4C037-528B-4E4F-A89B-FF4DF03593FD@gmail.com> Sorry, I don?t get it ? isn?t what Arturo quoted from Akhutina a perfectly fine definition of utterance? Also, it sounds like Bakhtin. This came past just as I was trying to explain to my Vietnamese teacher why spending a whole week practicing lists of vowel sounds, without the help of whole words, much less phrases and ?the living two-voice word,? was driving me crazy. Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com > On Mar 16, 2019, at 1:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. > The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: > > https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf > Andy > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >> >> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >> >> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >> >> Best >> >> Arturo >> >> >> -- >> Sent from Gmail Mobile -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/e5a77342/attachment.html From mpacker@cantab.net Sun Mar 17 09:32:39 2019 From: mpacker@cantab.net (Martin Packer) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 11:32:39 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> Message-ID: <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much longer sequence. Martin > On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. > The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: > > https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf > Andy > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >> >> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >> >> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >> >> Best >> >> Arturo >> >> >> -- >> Sent from Gmail Mobile Martin "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/b2735ca3/attachment.html From helenaworthen@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 09:45:23 2019 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 09:45:23 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> Message-ID: <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com > On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer wrote: > > According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much longer sequence. > > Martin > > > > >> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >> >> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. >> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >> >> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >> Andy >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>> >>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >>> >>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Arturo >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from Gmail Mobile > > > > Martin > > "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/a2eed455/attachment.html From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 14:17:57 2019 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 06:17:57 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> Message-ID: Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be considered as an utterance. You take down the book and open it. The novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And then you close the book and you put it back on the shelf. That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of showing that literature is not some "state within a state": it is also made of language stuff, by people who have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these things full time) distinguish sub-units within the novel which will help us understand how novels are structured, how this structure has changed with their function, and how the very functions have changed as literature has evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather than macroscopic) with the minimal pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of understanding how conversations get structured as they go along, how people know when its their turn to talk and how they know when the rules have been broken. But it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we all feel that when you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" there seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange as a whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using turns as the element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing is true of the way he uses "utterance". David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen wrote: > I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, > by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that > responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. > Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream > of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > > On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer wrote: > > According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is > the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is > functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; > request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move > within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is > a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much > longer sequence. > > Martin > > > > > On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer > actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a > compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step > backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind > saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or > something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of > activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: > commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two > units. > > The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin > Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: > > https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf > > Andy > ------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: > > Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. > > Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: > > The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, > unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries > within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what > reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from > a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech > to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the > inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that > he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, > evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective > (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building > material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony > is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying > personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and > the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech > acts, communication, and consciousness. > > Best > > Arturo > > > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > > > > Martin > > *"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss > matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my > partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with > the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)* > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/7ce40457/attachment.html From mpacker@cantab.net Sun Mar 17 15:14:23 2019 From: mpacker@cantab.net (Martin Packer) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 17:14:23 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic unit is the pair is precisely what helps us understand an exchange such as: A. How are you? B. Fine, thanks, and you? A. XXX One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, thanks,? while ?and you?? is the first part of a projected second pair. This is why one might have the intuition that speaker B is doing more than one thing (though I?d suggest 2, not 3), and that something more is expected from speaker A. Martin > On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be considered as an utterance. You take down the book and open it. The novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And then you close the book and you put it back on the shelf. > > That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of showing that literature is not some "state within a state": it is also made of language stuff, by people who have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these things full time) distinguish sub-units within the novel which will help us understand how novels are structured, how this structure has changed with their function, and how the very functions have changed as literature has evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). > > We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather than macroscopic) with the minimal pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of understanding how conversations get structured as they go along, how people know when its their turn to talk and how they know when the rules have been broken. But it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we all feel that when you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" there seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange as a whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using turns as the element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. > > Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing is true of the way he uses "utterance". > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > Some e-prints available at: > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen > wrote: > I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > >> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer > wrote: >> >> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much longer sequence. >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >>> >>> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. >>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >>> >>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>> Andy >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>>> >>>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >>>> >>>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> Arturo >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/2cc11ad4/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Sun Mar 17 17:12:36 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 11:12:36 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <93d8633b-6e92-d6cc-8de4-17e96fdb65e8@marxists.org> Yes, so we're almost in furious agreement on 'utterance'. But this contradicted by Akhutina saying 'the word is a? compressed version of the utterance'. It is not. A 'word' is something else - it is a sign for a concept. The limit case of an utterance, such as when a person responds: "Rubbish!" is also stretching the meaning of 'word' to its limits, so I don't think this is what is meant. It is just wrong. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 18/03/2019 3:45 am, Helena Worthen wrote: > I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on > two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it responds, > on the other, by the utterance that responds to it. Thus > you can discern utterances within utterances. Minimally, a > two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole > stream of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and > response. > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > >> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer >> > wrote: >> >> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in >> conversation is the adjacency pair:?a two-part exchange >> in which the second utterance is functionally dependent >> on the first.? Question-answer; greeting-greeting; >> request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a >> turn and a move within a conversation. ?An utterance is >> *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a >> larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much >> longer sequence. >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden >>> > wrote: >>> >>> I would? have appreciated a definition of some kind of >>> what the writer actually means by "utterance." In >>> absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of >>> the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards >>> because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't >>> mind saying that the two are together the micro- and >>> macro-units of dialogue (or something having that >>> meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of >>> activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of >>> political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a >>> complex process you always need two units. >>> >>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what >>> Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an >>> actor's performance: >>> >>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>>> >>>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their >>>> complementariness: >>>> >>>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the >>>> utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete >>>> in itself. The utterance always carries within it the >>>> marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what >>>> reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An >>>> utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional >>>> objective? and progresses through inner speech to >>>> external speech. The prime mover of the semantic >>>> progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible >>>> to me alone to the external speech that he, the >>>> listener, will understand) is the comparison of my >>>> subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the >>>> given word, and its objective (constant for both me and >>>> my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material >>>> for speech production is the living two-voice word. But >>>> polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in >>>> the word; the word carrying personal sense is an >>>> abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and >>>> the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are >>>> the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> Arturo >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> /"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs.?Seligman or?Dr. >> Lowie or discuss matters?with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, >> I?become at?once?aware that my partner does not >> understand anything in the matter, and I end usually?with >> the?feeling that this also applies to myself? >> (Malinowski, 1930)/ >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/44d704bd/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Sun Mar 17 17:20:28 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 11:20:28 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <84209e50-3d34-db2f-c831-b35b2dde3b31@marxists.org> David, I do deplore sloppiness, and apart form the issue of utterance=word, I found a lot of sloppiness in the quote, but not so much as to be worth analysis. But Bakhtin is correct in saying that a novel is an utterance. Like when we say "After his experiences in Spain, Orwell published /Homage to Catalonia/ and the Communist Party responded with a barrage of criticism ..." What interests me though is the intimate and inextricable relation between narrative and concept, each constituting the other. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 18/03/2019 8:17 am, David Kellogg wrote: > Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness > that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin > says that a whole novel can be considered as an utterance. > You take down the book and open it. The novelist has > something to say to you. He says it. And then you close > the book and you put it back on the shelf. > > That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of > showing that literature is not some "state within a > state": it is also made of language stuff, by people who > have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. But > it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these > things full time) distinguish sub-units within the novel > which will help us understand how novels are structured, > how this structure has changed with their function, and > how the very functions have changed as literature has > evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set > himself (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). > > We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather > than macroscopic) with the minimal pair (originally, in > the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). It's all very well > and it's very useful as a way of understanding how > conversations get structured as they go along, how people > know when its their turn to talk and how they know when > the rules have been broken. But it doesn't help us to > understand, for example, why we all feel that when you say > "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" > there seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, > and the exchange as a whole doesn't seem finished, even > though if we are using turns as the element (pair part) of > the minimal pair, it really should be. > > Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term > "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has rendered > it meaningless. I think the same thing is true of the way > he uses "utterance". > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S > ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND > ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, > British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: > 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > Some e-prints available at: > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen > > > wrote: > > I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded > on two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it > responds, on the other, by the utterance that responds > to it. Thus you can discern utterances within > utterances. Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin > says; maximally, a whole stream of briefer utterances > bounded by their prompt and response. > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > >> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer >> > wrote: >> >> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit >> in conversation is the adjacency pair:?a two-part >> exchange in which the second utterance is >> functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; >> greeting-greeting; request-reply, and so on. An >> utterance, then, is both a turn and a move within a >> conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in >> itself? - it is a component in a larger organization: >> at least a pair, and usually a much longer sequence. >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden >>> > wrote: >>> >>> I would? have appreciated a definition of some kind >>> of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In >>> absence of that "the word, as a compressed version >>> of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step >>> backwards because it obliterates a concept. >>> Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are >>> together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or >>> something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev >>> has two units of activity: action and activity, and >>> Marx has two units of political economy: commodity >>> and capital. To theorise a complex process you >>> always need two units. >>> >>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what >>> Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an >>> actor's performance: >>> >>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>>> >>>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their >>>> complementariness: >>>> >>>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the >>>> utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is >>>> complete in itself. The utterance always carries >>>> within it the marks and features of who is speaking >>>> to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it >>>> is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a >>>> motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses >>>> through inner speech to external speech. The prime >>>> mover of the semantic progression (from the inner >>>> word that is comprehensible to me alone to the >>>> external speech that he, the listener, will >>>> understand) is the comparison of my subjective, >>>> evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given >>>> word, and its objective (constant for both me and >>>> my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building >>>> material for speech production is the living >>>> two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the >>>> utterance as expressed in the word; the word >>>> carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the >>>> utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a >>>> compressed version of the utterance, are the units >>>> of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> Arturo >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> /"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs.?Seligman or?Dr. >> Lowie or discuss matters?with Radcliffe-Brown or >> Kroeber, I?become at?once?aware that my partner does >> not understand anything in the matter, and I end >> usually?with the?feeling that this also applies to >> myself? (Malinowski, 1930)/ >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/d8d5c4a3/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Sun Mar 17 17:27:49 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 11:27:49 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> Message-ID: <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> Martin, I get the point, but any complex process is made up of units, many of them.? That's the point of using analysis by units. The excerpt you give is a trivial one. In general you need /all/ the numerous utterances in a conversation to understand an extended interaction. It is like Engestrom who thinks when two activities interact, we have to have a new "fourth? generation" unit, i.e., two activity systems interacting. But that is only because he took the activity system as a /system /not a /unit /in the first place. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 18/03/2019 9:14 am, Martin Packer wrote: > Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic unit is > the pair is precisely what helps us understand an exchange > such as: > > A. How are you? > B. Fine, thanks, and you? > A. XXX > > One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, > thanks,? while ?and you?? is the first part of a projected > second pair. This is why one might have the intuition that > speaker B is doing more than one thing (though I?d suggest > 2, not 3), and that something more is expected from > speaker A. > > Martin > > > > >> On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg >> > wrote: >> >> Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness >> that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin >> says that a whole novel can be considered as an >> utterance. You take down the book and open it. The >> novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And >> then you close the book and you put it back on the shelf. >> >> That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of >> showing that literature is not some "state within a >> state": it is also made of language stuff, by people who >> have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. >> But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies >> these things full time) distinguish sub-units within the >> novel which will help us understand how novels are >> structured, how this structure has changed with their >> function, and how the very functions have changed as >> literature has evolved. And these WERE the problems which >> Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). >> >> We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather >> than macroscopic) with the minimal pair (originally, in >> the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). It's all very well >> and it's very useful as a way of understanding how >> conversations get structured as they go along, how people >> know when its their turn to talk and how they know when >> the rules have been broken. But it doesn't help us to >> understand, for example, why we all feel that when you >> say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and >> you?" there seem to be three utterances in the second >> pair part, and the exchange as a whole doesn't seem >> finished, even though if we are using turns as the >> element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. >> >> Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term >> "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has rendered >> it meaningless. I think the same thing is true of the way >> he uses "utterance". >> >> David Kellogg >> Sangmyung University >> >> New Article; >> >> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S >> ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND >> ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, >> British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: >> 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> >> Some e-prints available at: >> >> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen >> > > wrote: >> >> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded >> on two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it >> responds, on the other, by the utterance that >> responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances >> within utterances. Minimally, a two -part exchange, >> as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream of briefer >> utterances bounded by their prompt and response. >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> >> >>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer >>> > wrote: >>> >>> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit >>> in conversation is the adjacency pair:?a two-part >>> exchange in which the second utterance is >>> functionally dependent on the first.? >>> Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, >>> and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a >>> move within a conversation.? An utterance is *not* >>> ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a larger >>> organization: at least a pair, and usually a much >>> longer sequence. >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> I would? have appreciated a definition of some kind >>>> of what the writer actually means by "utterance." >>>> In absence of that "the word, as a compressed >>>> version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least >>>> a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. >>>> Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are >>>> together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or >>>> something having that meaning). The same as >>>> Leontyev has two units of activity: action and >>>> activity, and Marx has two units of political >>>> economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a >>>> complex process you always need two units. >>>> >>>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what >>>> Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an >>>> actor's performance: >>>> >>>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> Andy Blunden >>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>>>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>>>> >>>>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their >>>>> complementariness: >>>>> >>>>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the >>>>> utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is >>>>> complete in itself. The utterance always carries >>>>> within it the marks and features of who is >>>>> speaking to whom, for what reason and in what >>>>> situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops >>>>> from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and >>>>> progresses through inner speech to external >>>>> speech. The prime mover of the semantic >>>>> progression (from the inner word that is >>>>> comprehensible to me alone to the external speech >>>>> that he, the listener, will understand) is the >>>>> comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, >>>>> which I attribute to the given word, and its >>>>> objective (constant for both me and my listener) >>>>> meaning.Thus, the major building material for >>>>> speech production is the living two-voice word. >>>>> But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as >>>>> expressed in the word; the word carrying personal >>>>> sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, >>>>> the utterance and the word, as a compressed >>>>> version of the utterance, are the units of speech >>>>> acts, communication, and consciousness. >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> >>>>> Arturo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>> >>> >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> /"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs.?Seligman >>> or?Dr. Lowie or discuss matters?with Radcliffe-Brown >>> or Kroeber, I?become at?once?aware that my partner >>> does not understand anything in the matter, and I >>> end usually?with the?feeling that this also applies >>> to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)/ >>> >>> >>> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/f6792b82/attachment.html From hshonerd@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 20:45:42 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 21:45:42 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <84209e50-3d34-db2f-c831-b35b2dde3b31@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <84209e50-3d34-db2f-c831-b35b2dde3b31@marxists.org> Message-ID: Andy, Narrative and concept bring to my mind a distinction I remember reading about in a linguistics text by John Lyons: The syntagmatic (for example the narrative) and the syntagmatic (for example the concepts evoked within a narrative). Talking of relations, how do you see the relation between narrative and dialog? As a linguist, I especially like dialog, because I think it?s plausible that complex syntax--ofter exceedingly, yet pleasantly and effectively complex in (some) novels--developed in the misty past by a sort of pushing together of syntactically simpler turns--conversational turns often simply filling in the ?blanks" left by other turns. I apologize, if none of this makes sense to anybody but me. I was worried that it would just be trivial, but I think the linked computer science article implies that the syntagmatic/paradigmatic issue is relevant to this subject line, largely because Saussure appears at the end of the article. I confess I gave up trying to understand the article. Is there anybody out there that could show the relevance of the article to what has been said so far since related to Saussure and Peirce? https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/pra2.2015.1450520100122 Henry > On Mar 17, 2019, at 6:20 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > David, I do deplore sloppiness, and apart form the issue of utterance=word, I found a lot of sloppiness in the quote, but not so much as to be worth analysis. > > But Bakhtin is correct in saying that a novel is an utterance. Like when we say "After his experiences in Spain, Orwell published Homage to Catalonia and the Communist Party responded with a barrage of criticism ..." > > What interests me though is the intimate and inextricable relation between narrative and concept, each constituting the other. > > Andy > > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 18/03/2019 8:17 am, David Kellogg wrote: >> Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be considered as an utterance. You take down the book and open it. The novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And then you close the book and you put it back on the shelf. >> >> That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of showing that literature is not some "state within a state": it is also made of language stuff, by people who have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these things full time) distinguish sub-units within the novel which will help us understand how novels are structured, how this structure has changed with their function, and how the very functions have changed as literature has evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). >> >> We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather than macroscopic) with the minimal pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of understanding how conversations get structured as they go along, how people know when its their turn to talk and how they know when the rules have been broken. But it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we all feel that when you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" there seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange as a whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using turns as the element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. >> >> Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing is true of the way he uses "utterance". >> >> David Kellogg >> Sangmyung University >> >> New Article; >> >> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> Some e-prints available at: >> >> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen > wrote: >> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> >> >>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer > wrote: >>> >>> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much longer sequence. >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >>>> >>>> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. >>>> >>>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >>>> >>>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> Andy Blunden >>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>>>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>>>> >>>>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >>>>> >>>>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> >>>>> Arturo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>> >>> >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) >>> >>> >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/b41837f7/attachment.html From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 21:06:13 2019 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:06:13 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> Message-ID: Bakhtin is clear (in Speech Genres and Other Late Essays). He rejects "fictitious" units such as the sentence. He is looking for "real" (the Russian term he uses can also mean "actual" or "practical") units, and that unit is defined by the change in speaker. Now, here's the problem (and I strongly disagree with Andy that it is a trivial one--I think that if you want a trivial problem, the use of the TITLE "Homage to Catalonia" as a stand in or the complete text of Orwell's novel (was it even a novel?) is a much better example. We could cut the real, actual, practical unit in half and split it into two different adjacency pairs as you suggest. CA has a way of talking about this: it's "turn transition point" where a change of speaker is possible but not necessarily real, actual, practical. As soon as you do this, though, you have to admit (and real, actual, practical data will support this) that there are two such transition points--not just one--WITHIN your utterance (in addition to the real, actual, practical turn transition point. . A: How are you? B: Fine. A: Good. Now, you remember we were discussing Bakhtin when I saw you last and I made the point that "dialogue"is polysemic? A: How are you? B: Fine, thanks. A: Glad to hear it. Now, you remember we were discussing Bakhtin when I saw you last, and I made the point that 'dialogue' is polysemic? The "real, actual, practical" unit seems to have become a more potential, possible, virtual one. At the same time, though, it has taken a step in the direction that Bakhtin (and Harris, and other integrationists like Nigel Love) do not want to go:the direction of systemic-functional grammar, which recognizes as its unit of analysis a clause. And here Andy is one hundred percent right: there is no way that a "word" is simply a compressed clause (this is the point where Ruqaiya disagreed with Vygotsky, and Ruqaiya was, I think, correct). David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 7:16 AM Martin Packer wrote: > Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic unit is the pair is > precisely what helps us understand an exchange such as: > > A. How are you? > B. Fine, thanks, and you? > A. XXX > > One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, thanks,? while ?and > you?? is the first part of a projected second pair. This is why one might > have the intuition that speaker B is doing more than one thing (though I?d > suggest 2, not 3), and that something more is expected from speaker A. > > Martin > > > > > On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness that Andy is > deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be > considered as an utterance. You take down the book and open it. The > novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And then you close the > book and you put it back on the shelf. > > That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of showing that > literature is not some "state within a state": it is also made of language > stuff, by people who have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. > But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these things full > time) distinguish sub-units within the novel which will help us understand > how novels are structured, how this structure has changed with their > function, and how the very functions have changed as literature has > evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in > "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). > > We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather than macroscopic) > with the minimal pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). > It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of understanding how > conversations get structured as they go along, how people know when its > their turn to talk and how they know when the rules have been broken. But > it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we all feel that when > you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" there > seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange as a > whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using turns as the > element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. > > Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term "dialogue" in so many > different ways that he has rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing > is true of the way he uses "utterance". > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S > ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE > WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational > Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > Some e-prints available at: > > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, >> by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that >> responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. >> Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream >> of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> >> >> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer wrote: >> >> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is >> the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is >> functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; >> request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move >> within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is >> a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much >> longer sequence. >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: >> >> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer >> actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a >> compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step >> backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind >> saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or >> something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of >> activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: >> commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two >> units. >> >> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin >> Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >> >> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >> >> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >> >> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >> >> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, >> unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries >> within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what >> reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from >> a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech >> to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the >> inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that >> he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, >> evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective >> (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building >> material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony >> is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying >> personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and >> the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech >> acts, communication, and consciousness. >> >> Best >> >> Arturo >> >> >> -- >> Sent from Gmail Mobile >> >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> *"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss >> matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my >> partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with >> the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)* >> >> >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/e4da1e76/attachment.html From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 21:54:27 2019 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 22:54:27 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <93d8633b-6e92-d6cc-8de4-17e96fdb65e8@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <93d8633b-6e92-d6cc-8de4-17e96fdb65e8@marxists.org> Message-ID: Andy, Well... -greg p.s., Volosinov (Bakhtin?) has a lovely essay where he treats the word "Well..." as an utterance (or that is one translation of it - the other is "So"). So... On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 6:15 PM Andy Blunden wrote: > Yes, so we're almost in furious agreement on 'utterance'. But this > contradicted by Akhutina saying 'the word is a compressed version of the > utterance'. It is not. A 'word' is something else - it is a sign for a > concept. > > The limit case of an utterance, such as when a person responds: "Rubbish!" > is also stretching the meaning of 'word' to its limits, so I don't think > this is what is meant. It is just wrong. > > Andy > ------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 18/03/2019 3:45 am, Helena Worthen wrote: > > I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, > by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that > responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. > Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream > of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > > On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer wrote: > > According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is > the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is > functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; > request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move > within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is > a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much > longer sequence. > > Martin > > > > > On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer > actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a > compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step > backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind > saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or > something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of > activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: > commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two > units. > > The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin > Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: > > https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf > > Andy > ------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: > > Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. > > Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: > > The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, > unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries > within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what > reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from > a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech > to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the > inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that > he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, > evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective > (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building > material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony > is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying > personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and > the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech > acts, communication, and consciousness. > > Best > > Arturo > > > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > > > > Martin > > *"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss > matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my > partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with > the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)* > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/96aa4f30/attachment.html From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 22:00:56 2019 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 14:00:56 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <93d8633b-6e92-d6cc-8de4-17e96fdb65e8@marxists.org> Message-ID: Greg--It's Volosinov and not Bakhtin. "Dialogue in Art and Dialogue in Life". And the dialogue is: (Couple on a sofa. It is May. They are yearning for spring, and looking out the window. Because this is Russia, it starts to snow....) A: (looks dismayed) B: (sounds resigned) Well...! And here the integrationists (who, like Halliday, take the work of BOTH Firths--Raymond Firth and J.R. Firth very seriously) have a point. The dialogue requires context to be comprehensible, and so we filter out language and treat it as a n immutable code with some peril... David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:56 PM Greg Thompson wrote: > Andy, > > Well... > > -greg > p.s., Volosinov (Bakhtin?) has a lovely essay where he treats the word > "Well..." as an utterance (or that is one translation of it - the other is > "So"). So... > > On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 6:15 PM Andy Blunden wrote: > >> Yes, so we're almost in furious agreement on 'utterance'. But this >> contradicted by Akhutina saying 'the word is a compressed version of the >> utterance'. It is not. A 'word' is something else - it is a sign for a >> concept. >> >> The limit case of an utterance, such as when a person responds: >> "Rubbish!" is also stretching the meaning of 'word' to its limits, so I >> don't think this is what is meant. It is just wrong. >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 18/03/2019 3:45 am, Helena Worthen wrote: >> >> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, >> by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that >> responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. >> Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream >> of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> >> >> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer wrote: >> >> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is >> the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is >> functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; >> request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move >> within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is >> a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much >> longer sequence. >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: >> >> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer >> actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a >> compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step >> backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind >> saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or >> something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of >> activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: >> commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two >> units. >> >> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin >> Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >> >> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >> >> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >> >> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >> >> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, >> unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries >> within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what >> reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from >> a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech >> to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the >> inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that >> he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, >> evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective >> (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building >> material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony >> is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying >> personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and >> the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech >> acts, communication, and consciousness. >> >> Best >> >> Arturo >> >> >> -- >> Sent from Gmail Mobile >> >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> *"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss >> matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my >> partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with >> the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)* >> >> >> >> >> > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/7289c11d/attachment.html From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 22:03:02 2019 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 23:03:02 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> Message-ID: Andy, I'm not sure I understand your sense of "units"? Are the units (e.g., words) decomposable into units on their own? Or is their meaning also dependent upon the whole of which they are a part? (such that the meaning of words both make up the complex whole and are made up by teh complex whole). I tend to see language (along with, for that matter, Marx's commodity and capital) as the latter but I can't quite tell if you are with me or not. There are further troubles when it comes to looking cross linguistically at so-called words, e.g., with agglutinative languages where sentences are indeed words (or vice-versa). Not to mention the potential for smaller-than-word units to have meaning. This is a different problem from my question about units but it is a problem for taking words-as-units unless one isn't interested in those other languages. Enjoying the talk about talk, -greg On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 6:29 PM Andy Blunden wrote: > Martin, I get the point, but any complex process is made up of units, many > of them. That's the point of using analysis by units. The excerpt you give > is a trivial one. In general you need *all* the numerous utterances in a > conversation to understand an extended interaction. It is like Engestrom > who thinks when two activities interact, we have to have a new "fourth > generation" unit, i.e., two activity systems interacting. But that is only > because he took the activity system as a *system *not a *unit *in the > first place. > > Andy > ------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 18/03/2019 9:14 am, Martin Packer wrote: > > Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic unit is the pair is > precisely what helps us understand an exchange such as: > > A. How are you? > B. Fine, thanks, and you? > A. XXX > > One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, thanks,? while ?and > you?? is the first part of a projected second pair. This is why one might > have the intuition that speaker B is doing more than one thing (though I?d > suggest 2, not 3), and that something more is expected from speaker A. > > Martin > > > > > On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness that Andy is > deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be > considered as an utterance. You take down the book and open it. The > novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And then you close the > book and you put it back on the shelf. > > That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of showing that > literature is not some "state within a state": it is also made of language > stuff, by people who have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. > But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these things full > time) distinguish sub-units within the novel which will help us understand > how novels are structured, how this structure has changed with their > function, and how the very functions have changed as literature has > evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in > "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). > > We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather than macroscopic) > with the minimal pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). > It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of understanding how > conversations get structured as they go along, how people know when its > their turn to talk and how they know when the rules have been broken. But > it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we all feel that when > you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" there > seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange as a > whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using turns as the > element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. > > Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term "dialogue" in so many > different ways that he has rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing > is true of the way he uses "utterance". > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S > ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE > WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational > Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > Some e-prints available at: > > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen > wrote: > >> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, >> by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that >> responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. >> Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream >> of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. >> >> Helena Worthen >> helenaworthen@gmail.com >> >> >> >> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer wrote: >> >> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is >> the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is >> functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; >> request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move >> within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is >> a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much >> longer sequence. >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: >> >> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer >> actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a >> compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step >> backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind >> saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or >> something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of >> activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: >> commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two >> units. >> >> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin >> Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >> >> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >> >> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >> >> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >> >> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, >> unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries >> within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what >> reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from >> a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech >> to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the >> inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that >> he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, >> evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective >> (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building >> material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony >> is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying >> personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and >> the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech >> acts, communication, and consciousness. >> >> Best >> >> Arturo >> >> >> -- >> Sent from Gmail Mobile >> >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> *"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss >> matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my >> partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with >> the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)* >> >> >> >> >> > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/322ee566/attachment.html From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 22:07:37 2019 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 23:07:37 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <93d8633b-6e92-d6cc-8de4-17e96fdb65e8@marxists.org> Message-ID: Yes, that's the one David. Thanks for pulling it up so quickly! (and I'm in general agreement with you about Volosinov for a number of reasons but I'm no expert and so I indicate that by allowing for the possibility that I might be wrong (Bakhtin?)). -greg On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 11:04 PM David Kellogg wrote: > Greg--It's Volosinov and not Bakhtin. "Dialogue in Art and Dialogue in > Life". And the dialogue is: > > (Couple on a sofa. It is May. They are yearning for spring, and looking > out the window. Because this is Russia, it starts to snow....) > > A: (looks dismayed) > B: (sounds resigned) Well...! > > And here the integrationists (who, like Halliday, take the work of BOTH > Firths--Raymond Firth and J.R. Firth very seriously) have a point. The > dialogue requires context to be comprehensible, and so we filter out > language and treat it as a n immutable code with some peril... > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S > ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE > WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational > Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > Some e-prints available at: > > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:56 PM Greg Thompson > wrote: > >> Andy, >> >> Well... >> >> -greg >> p.s., Volosinov (Bakhtin?) has a lovely essay where he treats the word >> "Well..." as an utterance (or that is one translation of it - the other is >> "So"). So... >> >> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 6:15 PM Andy Blunden wrote: >> >>> Yes, so we're almost in furious agreement on 'utterance'. But this >>> contradicted by Akhutina saying 'the word is a compressed version of the >>> utterance'. It is not. A 'word' is something else - it is a sign for a >>> concept. >>> >>> The limit case of an utterance, such as when a person responds: >>> "Rubbish!" is also stretching the meaning of 'word' to its limits, so I >>> don't think this is what is meant. It is just wrong. >>> >>> Andy >>> ------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> On 18/03/2019 3:45 am, Helena Worthen wrote: >>> >>> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on >>> one, by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance >>> that responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. >>> Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream >>> of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer wrote: >>> >>> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is >>> the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is >>> functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; >>> request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move >>> within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is >>> a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much >>> longer sequence. >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: >>> >>> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer >>> actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a >>> compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step >>> backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind >>> saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or >>> something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of >>> activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: >>> commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two >>> units. >>> >>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin >>> Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >>> >>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>> >>> Andy >>> ------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>> >>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>> >>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >>> >>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An >>> utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always >>> carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for >>> what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops >>> from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner >>> speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression >>> (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external >>> speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my >>> subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its >>> objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major >>> building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But >>> polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word >>> carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the >>> utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the >>> units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Arturo >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> *"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss >>> matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my >>> partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with >>> the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >> Assistant Professor >> Department of Anthropology >> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >> Brigham Young University >> Provo, UT 84602 >> WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu >> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >> > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190317/fb111b11/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Sun Mar 17 22:38:58 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 16:38:58 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> Message-ID: <14b1f19c-3ad2-60fa-d4ab-87a908126254@marxists.org> Greg, *a word is a sign for a concep**t.* I have said this several times. I mean this as definitional, rather than saying predicating it to what may or not be counted as a word or a phrase or whatever. What is important for my work is the *concept *which the word or phrase or gesture or symbol or whatever signifies. It doesn't matter that unit is a part of an aglutinative sentence/word, or a combination of syllables or words. It is whatever is used in the given form of communication which evokes a universal concept (as opposed to /instances /of a concept or /activity /organised around a concept). Every science, insofar as it is a mature science, is founded on a unit not an arbitrary collection of phenomena. Further, it seems that every science has two units: one *micro *and one *macro *(at least; a science may have multiple subfields). It turns out the the unit is constitutive of the field of phenomena, which is redefined by the formation of the science. What we see in Thinking and Speech is word meaning and concept. What we see in Capital is commodity-exchange and capital. What we see in biology is cell and organism. In general, there is a macro unit which is typical of the phenomena we want to understand, but in order to do this we have to seek out the cell which can be understood viscerally, and combinations and interactions of which give us the macro unit. This macro unit justifies the name of unit (rather than system) only because it is the unit of a larger process; for example, a concept is a unit of a culture; a capital (i.e., a capitalist firm) is a unit of a capitalist economy; an organism is a unit of an ecosystem, . Make sense? Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 18/03/2019 4:03 pm, Greg Thompson wrote: > Andy, > > I'm not sure I understand your sense of "units"? Are the > units (e.g., words) decomposable into units on their own? > Or is their meaning also dependent upon the whole of which > they are a part? (such that the meaning of words both make > up the complex whole and are made up by teh complex > whole).? I tend to see language (along with, for that > matter, Marx's commodity and capital) as the latter but I > can't quite tell if you are with me or not. > > There are further troubles when it comes to looking cross > linguistically at so-called words, e.g., with > agglutinative languages where sentences are indeed words > (or vice-versa). Not to mention the potential for > smaller-than-word units to have meaning. This is a > different problem from my question about units but it is a > problem for taking words-as-units unless one isn't > interested in those other languages. > > Enjoying the talk about talk, > -greg > > On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 6:29 PM Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > Martin, I get the point, but any complex process is > made up of units, many of them.? That's the point of > using analysis by units. The excerpt you give is a > trivial one. In general you need /all/ the numerous > utterances in a conversation to understand an extended > interaction. It is like Engestrom who thinks when two > activities interact, we have to have a new "fourth? > generation" unit, i.e., two activity systems > interacting. But that is only because he took the > activity system as a /system /not a /unit /in the > first place. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 18/03/2019 9:14 am, Martin Packer wrote: >> Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic >> unit is the pair is precisely what helps us >> understand an exchange such as: >> >> A. How are you? >> B. Fine, thanks, and you? >> A. XXX >> >> One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, >> thanks,? while ?and you?? is the first part of a >> projected second pair. This is why one might have the >> intuition that speaker B is doing more than one thing >> (though I?d suggest 2, not 3), and that something >> more is expected from speaker A. >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg >>> > >>> wrote: >>> >>> Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of >>> sloppiness that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for >>> example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be >>> considered as an utterance. You take down the book >>> and open it. The novelist has something to say to >>> you. He says it. And then you close the book and you >>> put it back on the shelf. >>> >>> That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way >>> of showing that literature is not some "state within >>> a state": it is also made of language stuff, by >>> people who have a historical existence and not just >>> an afterlife. But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my >>> wife who studies these things full time) distinguish >>> sub-units within the novel which will help us >>> understand how novels are structured, how this >>> structure has changed with their function, and how >>> the very functions have changed as literature has >>> evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin >>> set himself (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). >>> >>> We see the same problem from the other end >>> (micro-rather than macroscopic) with the minimal >>> pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency >>> pair"). It's all very well and it's very useful as a >>> way of understanding how conversations get >>> structured as they go along, how people know when >>> its their turn to talk and how they know when the >>> rules have been broken. But it doesn't help us to >>> understand, for example, why we all feel that when >>> you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, >>> thanks, and you?" there seem to be three utterances >>> in the second pair part, and the exchange as a whole >>> doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using >>> turns as the element (pair part) of the minimal >>> pair, it really should be. >>> >>> Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term >>> "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has >>> rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing is >>> true of the way he uses "utterance". >>> >>> David Kellogg >>> Sangmyung University >>> >>> New Article; >>> >>> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: >>> VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL >>> DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES >>> OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational >>> Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>> >>> >>> Some e-prints available at: >>> >>> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen >>> >> > wrote: >>> >>> I find it useful to think of an utterance as >>> bounded on two ends: on one, by the utterance to >>> which it responds, on the other, by the >>> utterance that responds to it. Thus you can >>> discern utterances within utterances. Minimally, >>> a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, >>> a whole stream of briefer utterances bounded by >>> their prompt and response. >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer >>>> >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> According to conversation analysts, the minimal >>>> unit in conversation is the adjacency pair:?a >>>> two-part exchange in which the second utterance >>>> is functionally dependent on the first.? >>>> Question-answer; greeting-greeting; >>>> request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, >>>> is both a turn and a move within a >>>> conversation.? An utterance is *not* ?complete >>>> in itself? - it is a component in a larger >>>> organization: at least a pair, and usually a >>>> much longer sequence. >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden >>>>> >>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I would? have appreciated a definition of some >>>>> kind of what the writer actually means by >>>>> "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as >>>>> a compressed version of the utterance" is >>>>> nonsense, or at least a step backwards because >>>>> it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I >>>>> wouldn't mind saying that the two are together >>>>> the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or >>>>> something having that meaning). The same as >>>>> Leontyev has two units of activity: action and >>>>> activity, and Marx has two units of political >>>>> economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a >>>>> complex process you always need two units. >>>>> >>>>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of >>>>> what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the >>>>> units of an actor's performance: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>>>> >>>>> Andy >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>>>>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show >>>>>> their complementariness: >>>>>> >>>>>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is >>>>>> the utterance. An utterance, unlike a >>>>>> sentence, is complete in itself. The >>>>>> utterance always carries within it the marks >>>>>> and features of who is speaking to whom, for >>>>>> what reason and in what situation; it is >>>>>> polyphonic. An utterance develops from a >>>>>> motivation, ?a volitional objective? and >>>>>> progresses through inner speech to external >>>>>> speech. The prime mover of the semantic >>>>>> progression (from the inner word that is >>>>>> comprehensible to me alone to the external >>>>>> speech that he, the listener, will >>>>>> understand) is the comparison of my >>>>>> subjective, evanescent sense, which I >>>>>> attribute to the given word, and its >>>>>> objective (constant for both me and my >>>>>> listener) meaning.Thus, the major building >>>>>> material for speech production is the living >>>>>> two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of >>>>>> the utterance as expressed in the word; the >>>>>> word carrying personal sense is an >>>>>> abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the >>>>>> utterance and the word, as a compressed >>>>>> version of the utterance, are the units of >>>>>> speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> >>>>>> Arturo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> /"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs.?Seligman >>>> or?Dr. Lowie or discuss matters?with >>>> Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I?become >>>> at?once?aware that my partner does not >>>> understand anything in the matter, and I end >>>> usually?with the?feeling that this also applies >>>> to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/dc74a1c9/attachment.html From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sun Mar 17 23:13:02 2019 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 00:13:02 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <14b1f19c-3ad2-60fa-d4ab-87a908126254@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> <14b1f19c-3ad2-60fa-d4ab-87a908126254@marxists.org> Message-ID: Yes, that clarifies a good bit. (and I think helps me to understand some points of disagreement - and I feel like maybe I keep re-discovering these... and let me apologize in advance for the next time I ask for clarification after forgetting these differences all over once more). -greg On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 11:41 PM Andy Blunden wrote: > Greg, *a word is a sign for a concep**t.* I have said this several times. > I mean this as definitional, rather than saying predicating it to what may > or not be counted as a word or a phrase or whatever. What is important for > my work is the *concept *which the word or phrase or gesture or symbol or > whatever signifies. It doesn't matter that unit is a part of an > aglutinative sentence/word, or a combination of syllables or words. It is > whatever is used in the given form of communication which evokes a > universal concept (as opposed to *instances *of a concept or *activity *organised > around a concept). > > Every science, insofar as it is a mature science, is founded on a unit not > an arbitrary collection of phenomena. Further, it seems that every science > has two units: one *micro *and one *macro *(at least; a science may have > multiple subfields). It turns out the the unit is constitutive of the field > of phenomena, which is redefined by the formation of the science. > > What we see in Thinking and Speech is word meaning and concept. > What we see in Capital is commodity-exchange and capital. > What we see in biology is cell and organism. > > In general, there is a macro unit which is typical of the phenomena we > want to understand, but in order to do this we have to seek out the cell > which can be understood viscerally, and combinations and interactions of > which give us the macro unit. This macro unit justifies the name of unit > (rather than system) only because it is the unit of a larger process; for > example, a concept is a unit of a culture; a capital (i.e., a capitalist > firm) is a unit of a capitalist economy; an organism is a unit of an > ecosystem, . > > Make sense? > Andy > ------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 18/03/2019 4:03 pm, Greg Thompson wrote: > > Andy, > > I'm not sure I understand your sense of "units"? Are the units (e.g., > words) decomposable into units on their own? Or is their meaning also > dependent upon the whole of which they are a part? (such that the meaning > of words both make up the complex whole and are made up by teh complex > whole). I tend to see language (along with, for that matter, Marx's > commodity and capital) as the latter but I can't quite tell if you are with > me or not. > > There are further troubles when it comes to looking cross linguistically > at so-called words, e.g., with agglutinative languages where sentences are > indeed words (or vice-versa). Not to mention the potential for > smaller-than-word units to have meaning. This is a different problem from > my question about units but it is a problem for taking words-as-units > unless one isn't interested in those other languages. > > Enjoying the talk about talk, > -greg > > On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 6:29 PM Andy Blunden wrote: > >> Martin, I get the point, but any complex process is made up of units, >> many of them. That's the point of using analysis by units. The excerpt you >> give is a trivial one. In general you need *all* the numerous utterances >> in a conversation to understand an extended interaction. It is like >> Engestrom who thinks when two activities interact, we have to have a new >> "fourth generation" unit, i.e., two activity systems interacting. But that >> is only because he took the activity system as a *system *not a *unit *in >> the first place. >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 18/03/2019 9:14 am, Martin Packer wrote: >> >> Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic unit is the pair is >> precisely what helps us understand an exchange such as: >> >> A. How are you? >> B. Fine, thanks, and you? >> A. XXX >> >> One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, thanks,? while ?and >> you?? is the first part of a projected second pair. This is why one might >> have the intuition that speaker B is doing more than one thing (though I?d >> suggest 2, not 3), and that something more is expected from speaker A. >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg wrote: >> >> Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness that Andy is >> deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be >> considered as an utterance. You take down the book and open it. The >> novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And then you close the >> book and you put it back on the shelf. >> >> That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of showing that >> literature is not some "state within a state": it is also made of language >> stuff, by people who have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. >> But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these things full >> time) distinguish sub-units within the novel which will help us understand >> how novels are structured, how this structure has changed with their >> function, and how the very functions have changed as literature has >> evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in >> "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). >> >> We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather than >> macroscopic) with the minimal pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, >> "adjacency pair"). It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of >> understanding how conversations get structured as they go along, how people >> know when its their turn to talk and how they know when the rules have been >> broken. But it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we all feel >> that when you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" >> there seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange >> as a whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using turns as the >> element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. >> >> Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term "dialogue" in so many >> different ways that he has rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing >> is true of the way he uses "utterance". >> >> David Kellogg >> Sangmyung University >> >> New Article; >> >> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S >> ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE >> WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational >> Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> >> >> Some e-prints available at: >> >> >> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen >> wrote: >> >>> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on >>> one, by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance >>> that responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. >>> Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream >>> of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer wrote: >>> >>> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is >>> the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is >>> functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; >>> request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move >>> within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is >>> a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much >>> longer sequence. >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: >>> >>> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer >>> actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a >>> compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step >>> backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind >>> saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or >>> something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of >>> activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: >>> commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two >>> units. >>> >>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin >>> Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >>> >>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>> >>> Andy >>> ------------------------------ >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>> >>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>> >>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >>> >>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An >>> utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always >>> carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for >>> what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops >>> from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner >>> speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression >>> (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external >>> speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my >>> subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its >>> objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major >>> building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But >>> polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word >>> carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the >>> utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the >>> units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Arturo >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> *"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss >>> matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my >>> partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with >>> the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/442e907d/attachment.html From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Mon Mar 18 03:43:58 2019 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (Haydi Zulfei) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 10:43:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <93d8633b-6e92-d6cc-8de4-17e96fdb65e8@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <93d8633b-6e92-d6cc-8de4-17e96fdb65e8@marxists.org> Message-ID: <103699196.10927167.1552905838816@mail.yahoo.com> Andy and esteemed XMCA, It's our dilemma we meet the Dawn when you meet the Dusk. Now so many fruitful ideas and you have to forget the mutual consecutive turns. As far as I can see there's no furious agreement. I think what could have been problematic for you (though you usually go direct to Tatiana for removal of ambiguities or problems) is the fact that she used "is" instead of "could be"...a compressed version of the utterance , as we can surely invariably say "A word could be something else", "It could be a sign for a concept". Any word can be seen in its state of liquidity and flexibility because it is not a fossilized Mantra or Elixir. When we were being bombed by Iraq (them by us) just one word came to rescue lives : "Run!!" or just "Hey". All other things which necessitated the use of the word "Run!!" and those things are what we usually call "context" had been going on many many times reviewed and worked out , delivered and received , and many a time this single word too was obliterated and powdered and dried out within the larynx of the articulating creatures. Explicating these very situations on TV they went with words and also utterances on interminable streams and strings. This you have also learned from Vygotsky's reference to Tolstoy , from the "internal speech" predicated minimally or from the one sole "Allah" on the part of the Muslims on very many occasions which if were not for the underlying predispositions , required a plenitude of "utterances" minimal parings or broader. Your sticking to "sign for -just-concept" puts one in Wonderland. Sloppiness is a good term about Bakhtin whether in relation to his authoring of works still messy and foggy , the literary circle and the foundation , his struggle with the Soviet sole voice , the amputation? , his unprecedented attention to Dostoyevsky and the reason behind it (Lunacharsky) , the omission of a great part of his Magnum Opus now presented as an appendix , his way of averting and removing of "dialectics" replacing it with "dialogics" , and a game of approaching and distancing from the reigning power , his intermittent intervals of disappearance and re-emergence and survival to a relative good end , his dealing with terms such as addressivity , archetechtonics , polyphony , heterogloss (a glossary available) , etc. which makes reading his Opus very difficult (Thanks David for the help you gave me and my daughter on request!) When you fossilize and give stable duration for "word" as some cliche just for "concept" , why then considering "limits" "gradation" "fluidity" for word and if you regard word as a cover for versatile tiding and ebbing phenomena "the stretching of the MEANING of word" and I will add "affectation" "circumstantial predispositions" "changeability caused by slips of the tongue" "popular and folk randomized misuse of words ending in fixation" "loan words in disguise and final crystallization" etc.etc. , again why so strict on the transitional alterable cover.? As for the reduced case of "Rubbish" , it in fact kills the whole idea of voicedness especially poly-voicedness whether you believe it's wrong or exceptionally appropriate , to the point and plausible (thug in American Administration). For instance , if the addressee is horrified by such utterance and either is sunk in complete science using gaze or down-toning with a sigh running from the chest to the throat : Ah!! Mere Trash!! , the Human Communication disrupts. Voice for Bakhtin was counter to another voice he did not like to hear , hated to hear it , in suffocation and strangulation he opted for what he did. Haydi? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? On Monday, March 18, 2019, 3:45:18 AM GMT+3:30, Andy Blunden wrote: Yes, so we're almost in furious agreement on 'utterance'. But this contradicted by Akhutina saying 'the word is a? compressed version of the utterance'. It is not. A 'word' is something else - it is a sign for a concept. The limit case of an utterance, such as when a person responds: "Rubbish!" is also stretching the meaning of 'word' to its limits, so I don't think this is what is meant. It is just wrong. Andy Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 18/03/2019 3:45 am, Helena Worthen wrote: I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. ? Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer wrote: According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is the adjacency pair:?a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is functionally dependent on the first.? Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move within a conversation. ?An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much longer sequence. Martin On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: I would? have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf Andy Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate.? Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. Best Arturo -- Sent from Gmail Mobile Martin "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs.?Seligman or?Dr. Lowie or discuss matters?with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I?become at?once?aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually?with the?feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/d00b8fcd/attachment.html From mpacker@cantab.net Mon Mar 18 07:29:59 2019 From: mpacker@cantab.net (Martin Packer) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 09:29:59 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> Message-ID: > On Mar 17, 2019, at 11:06 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > As soon as you do this, though, you have to admit (and real, actual, practical data will support this) that there are two such transition points--not just one--WITHIN your utterance (in addition to the real, actual, practical turn transition point. . Right: CA refers to this as speaker self-selection. At a TRP (transition relevant place) the person who has been speaking continues to speak. So what?s the problem with that? Martin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/88ab4f29/attachment.html From mpacker@cantab.net Mon Mar 18 07:29:44 2019 From: mpacker@cantab.net (Martin Packer) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 09:29:44 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> Message-ID: <6A46B6CC-927E-41F3-BCC2-6020CA3CFEBD@cantab.net> Yes, it is indeed a trivial example. And yes, I agree that one needs all the utterances in a conversation to understand it. And equally, one needs all the conversation to understand a single utterance. More importantly, so do the speakers. But certainly an utterance can be comprised of a single word (Well; Rubbish; Eureka; or anything else), or even silence. And this implies that one needs all the conversation to understand a single word. To define a word solely as a sign for a concept seem to me to abstract it from its conversational, that's to say real world, context. A word *can* be a sign for a concept, but in practice it will also be a reference to a real or imagined concrete entity. To the extent that a science is a mediator, a tool, and not an abstract system it seems to me important to keep focus on how words are used in ongoing processes of conceptualization. Martin > On Mar 17, 2019, at 7:27 PM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > Martin, I get the point, but any complex process is made up of units, many of them. That's the point of using analysis by units. The excerpt you give is a trivial one. In general you need all the numerous utterances in a conversation to understand an extended interaction. It is like Engestrom who thinks when two activities interact, we have to have a new "fourth generation" unit, i.e., two activity systems interacting. But that is only because he took the activity system as a system not a unit in the first place. > > Andy > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 18/03/2019 9:14 am, Martin Packer wrote: >> Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic unit is the pair is precisely what helps us understand an exchange such as: >> >> A. How are you? >> B. Fine, thanks, and you? >> A. XXX >> >> One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, thanks,? while ?and you?? is the first part of a projected second pair. This is why one might have the intuition that speaker B is doing more than one thing (though I?d suggest 2, not 3), and that something more is expected from speaker A. >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: >>> >>> Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be considered as an utterance. You take down the book and open it. The novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And then you close the book and you put it back on the shelf. >>> >>> That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of showing that literature is not some "state within a state": it is also made of language stuff, by people who have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these things full time) distinguish sub-units within the novel which will help us understand how novels are structured, how this structure has changed with their function, and how the very functions have changed as literature has evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). >>> >>> We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather than macroscopic) with the minimal pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of understanding how conversations get structured as they go along, how people know when its their turn to talk and how they know when the rules have been broken. But it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we all feel that when you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" there seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange as a whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using turns as the element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. >>> >>> Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing is true of the way he uses "utterance". >>> >>> David Kellogg >>> Sangmyung University >>> >>> New Article; >>> >>> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>> >>> Some e-prints available at: >>> >>> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen > wrote: >>> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. >>> >>> Helena Worthen >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer > wrote: >>>> >>>> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much longer sequence. >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. >>>>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>>>> Andy >>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>>>>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >>>>>> >>>>>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> >>>>>> Arturo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> Martin "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/0986d3ca/attachment.html From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Mon Mar 18 09:30:51 2019 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (Haydi Zulfei) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 16:30:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <6A46B6CC-927E-41F3-BCC2-6020CA3CFEBD@cantab.net> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> <6A46B6CC-927E-41F3-BCC2-6020CA3CFEBD@cantab.net> Message-ID: <1759812130.11386824.1552926651443@mail.yahoo.com> Martin, This sounds very well. And I have to say I've been reading your thick (400+) book and that I should continue to read it to the end but *one thing* : as we've also had it before when you first talked about "What is science?" , sent the separate draft (Now read and pinned to the book to make it just thicker) , yes , one thing : "To define a word solely as a sign for a concept seem to me to abstract it from its conversational, that's to say , **real world, context. A word *can* be a sign for a concept, but in practice it will also be a reference to a **real or imagined?? **concrete entity."? 1. Concrete entity in a REAL world. So far I've spotted and marked just two cases in your book where "real" means "material" as we intend to mean "corporeal". Last time I understood you excepted the Natural World while you tried to give independence to the Qual Science or Research as having the REAL ENTITIES AND BODIES etc. By "implicit ontology" you meant , I think , derived existence. What is your take on the interactions between the independent? existences (yet cognizable in themselves#Kant) and derived existences (tied to the existence of a Mind). Taking a science as an instance , how you define its ontology and epistemology? 2. Also here I would like to inquire about the existence of a "concrete entity" in an imagined world if I'm not mistaken. And I seek permission to draw Andy's attention to the fact that concepts find their ways to words not words in a reverse direction to concepts. Any concept could be or is a word but not that ANY word could necessarily be a concept.? Haydi? ? On Monday, March 18, 2019, 6:02:14 PM GMT+3:30, Martin Packer wrote: Yes, it is indeed a trivial example. And yes, I agree that one needs all the utterances in a conversation to understand it. And equally, one needs all the conversation to understand a single utterance. More importantly, so do the speakers. But certainly an utterance can be comprised of a single word (Well; Rubbish; Eureka; or anything else), or even silence. And this implies that one needs all the conversation to understand a single word. To define a word solely as a sign for a concept seem to me to abstract it from its conversational, that's to say real world, context. A word *can* be a sign for a concept, but in practice it will also be a reference to a real or imagined concrete entity. To the extent that a science is a mediator, a tool, and not an abstract system it seems to me important to keep focus on how words are used in ongoing processes of conceptualization. Martin On Mar 17, 2019, at 7:27 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: Martin, I get the point, but any complex process is made up of units, many of them.? That's the point of using analysis by units. The excerpt you give is a trivial one. In general you need all the numerous utterances in a conversation to understand an extended interaction. It is like Engestrom who thinks when two activities interact, we have to have a new "fourth? generation" unit, i.e., two activity systems interacting. But that is only because he took the activity system as a system not a unit in the first place. Andy Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 18/03/2019 9:14 am, Martin Packer wrote: Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic unit is the pair is precisely what helps us understand an exchange such as: A. How are you? B. Fine, thanks, and you? A. XXX One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, thanks,? while ?and you?? is the first part of a projected second pair. This is why one might have the intuition that speaker B is doing more than one thing (though I?d suggest 2, not 3), and that something more is expected from speaker A.? Martin On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg wrote: Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be considered as an utterance. You take down the book and open it. The novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And then you close the book and you put it back on the shelf. That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of showing that literature is not some "state within a state": it is also made of language stuff, by people who have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these things full time) distinguish sub-units within the novel which will help us understand how novels are structured, how this structure has changed with their function, and how the very functions have changed as literature has evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather than macroscopic) with the minimal pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of understanding how conversations get structured as they go along, how people know when its their turn to talk and how they know when the rules have been broken. But it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we all feel that when you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" there seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange as a whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using turns as the element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing is true of the way he uses "utterance".? David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; ?David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200???????????????????????????????? Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen wrote: I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. ? Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer wrote: According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is the adjacency pair:?a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is functionally dependent on the first.? Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move within a conversation.? An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much longer sequence. Martin On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: I would? have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf Andy Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate.? Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. Best Arturo -- Sent from Gmail Mobile Martin "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs.?Seligman or?Dr. Lowie or discuss matters?with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I?become at?once?aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually?with the?feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) Martin "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs.?Seligman or?Dr. Lowie or discuss matters?with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I?become at?once?aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually?with the?feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/d925353f/attachment.html From hshonerd@gmail.com Mon Mar 18 16:39:00 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 17:39:00 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <6A46B6CC-927E-41F3-BCC2-6020CA3CFEBD@cantab.net> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> <6A46B6CC-927E-41F3-BCC2-6020CA3CFEBD@cantab.net> Message-ID: <8E1B8143-2B1A-4F52-AC3A-A84BBD0E74D1@gmail.com> Martin, And you seem to be saying to David that evoked word meaning, as it develops while speaking, can evoke a call in the middle of an utterance and then invites a response, perhaps with downward intonation and the ending of a clause. The listener responds to the call, evokes a new call, and then points to a turn with either or both intonation and syntax. This is all done syntagmatically through dialog, but what is evoked is highly paradigmatic. Perhaps Andy would say coceptual. The cherry on top is THIS dialog. Me gusta mucho! Henry > On Mar 18, 2019, at 8:29 AM, Martin Packer wrote: > > Yes, it is indeed a trivial example. And yes, I agree that one needs all the utterances in a conversation to understand it. And equally, one needs all the conversation to understand a single utterance. More importantly, so do the speakers. But certainly an utterance can be comprised of a single word (Well; Rubbish; Eureka; or anything else), or even silence. And this implies that one needs all the conversation to understand a single word. To define a word solely as a sign for a concept seem to me to abstract it from its conversational, that's to say real world, context. A word *can* be a sign for a concept, but in practice it will also be a reference to a real or imagined concrete entity. To the extent that a science is a mediator, a tool, and not an abstract system it seems to me important to keep focus on how words are used in ongoing processes of conceptualization. > > Martin > > > > >> On Mar 17, 2019, at 7:27 PM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >> >> Martin, I get the point, but any complex process is made up of units, many of them. That's the point of using analysis by units. The excerpt you give is a trivial one. In general you need all the numerous utterances in a conversation to understand an extended interaction. It is like Engestrom who thinks when two activities interact, we have to have a new "fourth generation" unit, i.e., two activity systems interacting. But that is only because he took the activity system as a system not a unit in the first place. >> >> Andy >> >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 18/03/2019 9:14 am, Martin Packer wrote: >>> Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic unit is the pair is precisely what helps us understand an exchange such as: >>> >>> A. How are you? >>> B. Fine, thanks, and you? >>> A. XXX >>> >>> One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, thanks,? while ?and you?? is the first part of a projected second pair. This is why one might have the intuition that speaker B is doing more than one thing (though I?d suggest 2, not 3), and that something more is expected from speaker A. >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: >>>> >>>> Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be considered as an utterance. You take down the book and open it. The novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And then you close the book and you put it back on the shelf. >>>> >>>> That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of showing that literature is not some "state within a state": it is also made of language stuff, by people who have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these things full time) distinguish sub-units within the novel which will help us understand how novels are structured, how this structure has changed with their function, and how the very functions have changed as literature has evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). >>>> >>>> We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather than macroscopic) with the minimal pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of understanding how conversations get structured as they go along, how people know when its their turn to talk and how they know when the rules have been broken. But it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we all feel that when you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" there seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange as a whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using turns as the element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. >>>> >>>> Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing is true of the way he uses "utterance". >>>> >>>> David Kellogg >>>> Sangmyung University >>>> >>>> New Article; >>>> >>>> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>>> >>>> Some e-prints available at: >>>> >>>> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen > wrote: >>>> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much longer sequence. >>>>> >>>>> Martin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. >>>>>> >>>>>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>>>>> Andy >>>>>> >>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>>>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>>>>>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Arturo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Martin >>>>> >>>>> "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> > > > > Martin > > "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190318/837a443d/attachment.html From andyb@marxists.org Mon Mar 18 18:27:26 2019 From: andyb@marxists.org (Andy Blunden) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 12:27:26 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <6A46B6CC-927E-41F3-BCC2-6020CA3CFEBD@cantab.net> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> <6A46B6CC-927E-41F3-BCC2-6020CA3CFEBD@cantab.net> Message-ID: <06ec51de-96f0-1c8f-fc59-7f9f8d34f15a@marxists.org> Yes, all true, Martin, but in my view in saying that *a word is a sign for a concept*, the real or imagined entity which is deemed to be a /instance/ of the concept is a *moment**of the concept*, as are the /practices/ whereby those instances are subsumed under the universal. I should have made that clear. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm On 19/03/2019 1:29 am, Martin Packer wrote: > Yes, it is indeed a trivial example. And yes, I agree that > one needs all the utterances in a conversation to > understand it. And equally, one needs all the conversation > to understand a single utterance. More importantly, so do > the speakers. But certainly an utterance can be comprised > of a single word (Well; Rubbish; Eureka; or anything > else), or even silence. And this implies that one needs > all the conversation to understand a single word. To > define a word solely as a sign for a concept seem to me to > abstract it from its conversational, that's to say real > world, context. A word *can* be a sign for a concept, but > in practice*_it will also be a reference to a real or > imagined concrete entity_*. To the extent that a science > is a mediator, a tool, and not an abstract system it seems > to me important to keep focus on how words are used in > ongoing processes of conceptualization. > > Martin > > > > >> On Mar 17, 2019, at 7:27 PM, Andy Blunden >> > wrote: >> >> Martin, I get the point, but any complex process is made >> up of units, many of them.? That's the point of using >> analysis by units. The excerpt you give is a trivial one. >> In general you need /all/ the numerous utterances in a >> conversation to understand an extended interaction. It is >> like Engestrom who thinks when two activities interact, >> we have to have a new "fourth? generation" unit, i.e., >> two activity systems interacting. But that is only >> because he took the activity system as a /system /not a >> /unit /in the first place. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Andy Blunden >> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >> On 18/03/2019 9:14 am, Martin Packer wrote: >>> Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic unit >>> is the pair is precisely what helps us understand an >>> exchange such as: >>> >>> A. How are you? >>> B. Fine, thanks, and you? >>> A. XXX >>> >>> One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, >>> thanks,? while ?and you?? is the first part of a >>> projected second pair. This is why one might have the >>> intuition that speaker B is doing more than one thing >>> (though I?d suggest 2, not 3), and that something more >>> is expected from speaker A. >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of >>>> sloppiness that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for >>>> example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be >>>> considered as an utterance. You take down the book and >>>> open it. The novelist has something to say to you. He >>>> says it. And then you close the book and you put it >>>> back on the shelf. >>>> >>>> That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of >>>> showing that literature is not some "state within a >>>> state": it is also made of language stuff, by people >>>> who have a historical existence and not just an >>>> afterlife. But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife >>>> who studies these things full time) distinguish >>>> sub-units within the novel which will help us >>>> understand how novels are structured, how this >>>> structure has changed with their function, and how the >>>> very functions have changed as literature has evolved. >>>> And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself >>>> (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). >>>> >>>> We see the same problem from the other end >>>> (micro-rather than macroscopic) with the minimal pair >>>> (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). >>>> It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of >>>> understanding how conversations get structured as they >>>> go along, how people know when its their turn to talk >>>> and how they know when the rules have been broken. But >>>> it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we >>>> all feel that when you say "How are you?" and somebody >>>> says "Fine, thanks, and you?" there seem to be three >>>> utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange as >>>> a whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are >>>> using turns as the element (pair part) of the minimal >>>> pair, it really should be. >>>> >>>> Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term >>>> "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has >>>> rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing is true >>>> of the way he uses "utterance". >>>> >>>> David Kellogg >>>> Sangmyung University >>>> >>>> New Article; >>>> >>>> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S >>>> ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND >>>> ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, >>>> British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: >>>> 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>>> >>>> >>>> Some e-prints available at: >>>> >>>> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen >>>> >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> I find it useful to think of an utterance as >>>> bounded on two ends: on one, by the utterance to >>>> which it responds, on the other, by the utterance >>>> that responds to it. Thus you can discern >>>> utterances within utterances. Minimally, a two >>>> -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole >>>> stream of briefer utterances bounded by their >>>> prompt and response. >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer >>>>> > >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> According to conversation analysts, the minimal >>>>> unit in conversation is the adjacency pair:?a >>>>> two-part exchange in which the second utterance is >>>>> functionally dependent on the first. >>>>> Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, >>>>> and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and >>>>> a move within a conversation.? An utterance is >>>>> *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in >>>>> a larger organization: at least a pair, and >>>>> usually a much longer sequence. >>>>> >>>>> Martin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden >>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I would? have appreciated a definition of some >>>>>> kind of what the writer actually means by >>>>>> "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a >>>>>> compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, >>>>>> or at least a step backwards because it >>>>>> obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind >>>>>> saying that the two are together the micro- and >>>>>> macro-units of dialogue (or something having that >>>>>> meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of >>>>>> activity: action and activity, and Marx has two >>>>>> units of political economy: commodity and >>>>>> capital. To theorise a complex process you always >>>>>> need two units. >>>>>> >>>>>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of >>>>>> what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the >>>>>> units of an actor's performance: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>>>>> >>>>>> Andy >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>>>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>>>>>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their >>>>>>> complementariness: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the >>>>>>> utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is >>>>>>> complete in itself. The utterance always carries >>>>>>> within it the marks and features of who is >>>>>>> speaking to whom, for what reason and in what >>>>>>> situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance >>>>>>> develops from a motivation, ?a volitional >>>>>>> objective? and progresses through inner speech >>>>>>> to external speech. The prime mover of the >>>>>>> semantic progression (from the inner word that >>>>>>> is comprehensible to me alone to the external >>>>>>> speech that he, the listener, will understand) >>>>>>> is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent >>>>>>> sense, which I attribute to the given word, and >>>>>>> its objective (constant for both me and my >>>>>>> listener) meaning.Thus, the major building >>>>>>> material for speech production is the living >>>>>>> two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of >>>>>>> the utterance as expressed in the word; the word >>>>>>> carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of >>>>>>> the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, >>>>>>> as a compressed version of the utterance, are >>>>>>> the units of speech acts, communication, and >>>>>>> consciousness. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Arturo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Martin >>>>> >>>>> /"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs.?Seligman >>>>> or?Dr. Lowie or discuss matters?with >>>>> Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I?become at?once?aware >>>>> that my partner does not understand anything in >>>>> the matter, and I end usually?with the?feeling >>>>> that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> > > > > Martin > > /"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs.?Seligman or?Dr. > Lowie or discuss matters?with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, > I?become at?once?aware that my partner does not understand > anything in the matter, and I end usually?with the?feeling > that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930)/ > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190319/e926bce0/attachment.html From mpacker@cantab.net Tue Mar 19 18:04:42 2019 From: mpacker@cantab.net (Martin Packer) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 20:04:42 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: <06ec51de-96f0-1c8f-fc59-7f9f8d34f15a@marxists.org> References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> <373a5e3a-0578-12c6-b634-dbd958461978@marxists.org> <6A46B6CC-927E-41F3-BCC2-6020CA3CFEBD@cantab.net> <06ec51de-96f0-1c8f-fc59-7f9f8d34f15a@marxists.org> Message-ID: <53FEAB1D-1AE6-40FE-AEFB-715E4CAFAD04@cantab.net> I am impatient to reply to your message, Andy, along with several others. However I have an inflamed eye, and so I have to stay away from screens for a day or two? Martin "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) > On Mar 18, 2019, at 8:27 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > Yes, all true, Martin, but in my view in saying that a word is a sign for a concept, the real or imagined entity which is deemed to be a instance of the concept is a moment of the concept, as are the practices whereby those instances are subsumed under the universal. I should have made that clear. > > Andy > Andy Blunden > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm > On 19/03/2019 1:29 am, Martin Packer wrote: >> Yes, it is indeed a trivial example. And yes, I agree that one needs all the utterances in a conversation to understand it. And equally, one needs all the conversation to understand a single utterance. More importantly, so do the speakers. But certainly an utterance can be comprised of a single word (Well; Rubbish; Eureka; or anything else), or even silence. And this implies that one needs all the conversation to understand a single word. To define a word solely as a sign for a concept seem to me to abstract it from its conversational, that's to say real world, context. A word *can* be a sign for a concept, but in practice it will also be a reference to a real or imagined concrete entity. To the extent that a science is a mediator, a tool, and not an abstract system it seems to me important to keep focus on how words are used in ongoing processes of conceptualization. >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 7:27 PM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >>> >>> Martin, I get the point, but any complex process is made up of units, many of them. That's the point of using analysis by units. The excerpt you give is a trivial one. In general you need all the numerous utterances in a conversation to understand an extended interaction. It is like Engestrom who thinks when two activities interact, we have to have a new "fourth generation" unit, i.e., two activity systems interacting. But that is only because he took the activity system as a system not a unit in the first place. >>> >>> Andy >>> Andy Blunden >>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>> On 18/03/2019 9:14 am, Martin Packer wrote: >>>> Seems to me, David, that the notion that the basic unit is the pair is precisely what helps us understand an exchange such as: >>>> >>>> A. How are you? >>>> B. Fine, thanks, and you? >>>> A. XXX >>>> >>>> One pair is constituted by ?How are you? and ?Fine, thanks,? while ?and you?? is the first part of a projected second pair. This is why one might have the intuition that speaker B is doing more than one thing (though I?d suggest 2, not 3), and that something more is expected from speaker A. >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:17 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Well, Bakhtin is full of precisely the kind of sloppiness that Andy is deploring, Helena. So for example Bakhtin says that a whole novel can be considered as an utterance. You take down the book and open it. The novelist has something to say to you. He says it. And then you close the book and you put it back on the shelf. >>>>> >>>>> That's all very well, and it's very useful as a way of showing that literature is not some "state within a state": it is also made of language stuff, by people who have a historical existence and not just an afterlife. But it doesn't help Andy (or me, or my wife who studies these things full time) distinguish sub-units within the novel which will help us understand how novels are structured, how this structure has changed with their function, and how the very functions have changed as literature has evolved. And these WERE the problems which Bakhtin set himself (e.g. in "Novel and Epic" and elsewhere). >>>>> >>>>> We see the same problem from the other end (micro-rather than macroscopic) with the minimal pair (originally, in the work of Sacks, "adjacency pair"). It's all very well and it's very useful as a way of understanding how conversations get structured as they go along, how people know when its their turn to talk and how they know when the rules have been broken. But it doesn't help us to understand, for example, why we all feel that when you say "How are you?" and somebody says "Fine, thanks, and you?" there seem to be three utterances in the second pair part, and the exchange as a whole doesn't seem finished, even though if we are using turns as the element (pair part) of the minimal pair, it really should be. >>>>> >>>>> Craig Brandist remarks that Bakhtin uses the term "dialogue" in so many different ways that he has rendered it meaningless. I think the same thing is true of the way he uses "utterance". >>>>> >>>>> David Kellogg >>>>> Sangmyung University >>>>> >>>>> New Article; >>>>> >>>>> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>>>> >>>>> Some e-prints available at: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:47 AM Helena Worthen > wrote: >>>>> I find it useful to think of an utterance as bounded on two ends: on one, by the utterance to which it responds, on the other, by the utterance that responds to it. Thus you can discern utterances within utterances. Minimally, a two -part exchange, as Martin says; maximally, a whole stream of briefer utterances bounded by their prompt and response. >>>>> >>>>> Helena Worthen >>>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 17, 2019, at 9:32 AM, Martin Packer > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> According to conversation analysts, the minimal unit in conversation is the adjacency pair: a two-part exchange in which the second utterance is functionally dependent on the first. Question-answer; greeting-greeting; request-reply, and so on. An utterance, then, is both a turn and a move within a conversation. An utterance is *not* ?complete in itself? - it is a component in a larger organization: at least a pair, and usually a much longer sequence. >>>>>> >>>>>> Martin >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mar 16, 2019, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would have appreciated a definition of some kind of what the writer actually means by "utterance." In absence of that "the word, as a compressed version of the utterance" is nonsense, or at least a step backwards because it obliterates a concept. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind saying that the two are together the micro- and macro-units of dialogue (or something having that meaning). The same as Leontyev has two units of activity: action and activity, and Marx has two units of political economy: commodity and capital. To theorise a complex process you always need two units. >>>>>>> The rest of what you have cited reminds me of what Constantin Stanislavskii said about the units of an actor's performance: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/seminars/stanislavskii.pdf >>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>> Andy Blunden >>>>>>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm >>>>>>> On 16/03/2019 5:42 pm, Arturo Escandon wrote: >>>>>>>> Thanks for that conceptual jewel, mate. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Let me bring here Akhutina to further show their complementariness: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The minimal holistic unit of conversation is the utterance. An utterance, unlike a sentence, is complete in itself. The utterance always carries within it the marks and features of who is speaking to whom, for what reason and in what situation; it is polyphonic. An utterance develops from a motivation, ?a volitional objective? and progresses through inner speech to external speech. The prime mover of the semantic progression (from the inner word that is comprehensible to me alone to the external speech that he, the listener, will understand) is the comparison of my subjective, evanescent sense, which I attribute to the given word, and its objective (constant for both me and my listener) meaning.Thus, the major building material for speech production is the living two-voice word. But polyphony is a feature of the utterance as expressed in the word; the word carrying personal sense is an abbreviation of the utterance. Thus, the utterance and the word, as a compressed version of the utterance, are the units of speech acts, communication, and consciousness. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Arturo >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Martin >>>>>> >>>>>> "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with the feeling that this also applies to myself? (Malinowski, 1930) >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190319/2ebefa4c/attachment.html From dkellogg60@gmail.com Wed Mar 20 08:27:16 2019 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 00:27:16 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Saussure vs Peirce In-Reply-To: References: <7773bf30-7526-ea91-fe0d-665d192d9cd5@marxists.org> <9f3eef80-1caf-a662-84f1-42466abafec3@marxists.org> <5d7d0173-e9e7-23d6-e831-120d7e8e7289@marxists.org> <4ED8D190-08FC-446C-94C3-8D5497D76AA8@tlu.ee> <63a8104e-782a-bb05-04e6-82c0d33406b2@marxists.org> <0d13dd85-0d87-0542-7846-beaaa07b88ab@marxists.org> <62CEFC32-5F7F-4D61-8E06-DF7E1AC6F2DF@cantab.net> <5D9EC25C-E958-4BC5-A64A-2086436D53F3@gmail.com> <231A47AB-C85C-4E4D-A52C-9AE05F675BC3@cantab.net> Message-ID: Martin: >From the CA point of view, there isn't anything wrong with it. Like many branches of linguistics (and mathematics), CA has its ducks in a row, and its system is well designed to prevent internal contradictions. For example, CA insists that no theoretical "preconceptions" be brought to the data, and in that sense it is "radically empiricist". I think the problem arises when you try to incorporate concepts from abroad, including Bakhtin. If we say that turns are "real, actual, factual" units ("in the air", as J.J. Gibson used to say--quite incorrectly, as it turns out--of the phoneme), then the fact that an utterance seems to end in the middle of a turn is embarrassing. It undoes the attempt by CA to do an end run around Saussure's notion that the object of study in linguistics is created only by our attitude towards it (that is, we have to understand that something is language before we can study it as language and not simply noise). >From a Vygotskyan point of view, this radical empiricism will not do: a dog with headphones could easily segment the "real, actual, factual" turns in data, but not the utterances if we define them by potential turn transition points (or TRPs, or whatever). But it's precisely units that would escape a dog in headphones that make the sound signal into human language, into a meaningful sign, and not simply a signal. David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 11:32 PM Martin Packer wrote: > > On Mar 17, 2019, at 11:06 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > As soon as you do this, though, you have to admit (and real, actual, > practical data will support this) that there are two such transition > points--not just one--WITHIN your utterance (in addition to the real, > actual, practical turn transition point. . > > > Right: CA refers to this as speaker self-selection. At a TRP (transition > relevant place) the person who has been speaking continues to speak. > > So what?s the problem with that? > > Martin > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190321/ec886bf7/attachment.html From a.j.gil@ils.uio.no Wed Mar 27 12:32:56 2019 From: a.j.gil@ils.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 19:32:56 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fernando Rey Message-ID: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> Dear all, Fernando Gonz?lez Rey (1949-2019) For the CHAT community, it is a deep sorrow to inform of the untimely death of our colleague and friend Fernando Gonz?lez Rey on the night of March 26, in the city of S?o Paulo, at 69 years of age. A deep and powerful live devoted to psychology and social sciences, to understanding Vygotsky and going beyond his legacy; to opening new horizons regarding human personality, qualitative methodology, motivation, sense, perezhivanie and subjectivity from a cultural-historical approach. His ashes will be taken to Cuba, where he was born, and as he was wish. We are sure that his strength, integrity, sense of humor and passionate for life, for psychology and for social and human sciences will remain alive on our thoughts and hearts. ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190327/89c9f916/attachment.html From wagner.schmit@gmail.com Wed Mar 27 12:47:20 2019 From: wagner.schmit@gmail.com (Wagner Luiz Schmit) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 16:47:20 -0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fernando Rey In-Reply-To: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> References: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: I had the opportunity to meet and learn much with Professor Fernando, there goes the opportunities to new "vivencias" with him, but the memories, lessons, books and human development will stay. Wagner Luiz Schmit UNESP - Brazil On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 4:34 PM Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Dear all, > > > Fernando Gonz?lez Rey (1949-2019) > > For the CHAT community, it is a deep sorrow to inform of the > untimely death of > our colleague and friend Fernando Gonz?lez Rey on the night of March 26, > in the city of S?o Paulo, at 69 years of age. A deep and powerful live > devoted to psychology and social sciences, to understanding Vygotsky and > going > beyond his legacy; to opening new horizons regarding human personality, > qualitative methodology, motivation, sense, perezhivanie and subjectivity > from a cultural-historical approach. His ashes will be taken to Cuba, > where he was born, and as he was wish. We are sure that his strength, > integrity, sense of humor and passionate for life, for psychology and for > social and human sciences will remain alive on our thoughts and hearts. > > > ? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190327/c77e428e/attachment.html From laires11@gmail.com Wed Mar 27 12:50:36 2019 From: laires11@gmail.com (Luisa Aires) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 19:50:36 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fernando Rey In-Reply-To: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> References: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: Sinto muito, Alfredo. Abra?o, Lu?sa A. Alfredo Jornet Gil escreveu no dia quarta, 27/03/2019 ?(s) 19:34: > Dear all, > > > Fernando Gonz?lez Rey (1949-2019) > > For the CHAT community, it is a deep sorrow to inform of the > untimely death of > our colleague and friend Fernando Gonz?lez Rey on the night of March 26, > in the city of S?o Paulo, at 69 years of age. A deep and powerful live > devoted to psychology and social sciences, to understanding Vygotsky and > going > beyond his legacy; to opening new horizons regarding human personality, > qualitative methodology, motivation, sense, perezhivanie and subjectivity > from a cultural-historical approach. His ashes will be taken to Cuba, > where he was born, and as he was wish. We are sure that his strength, > integrity, sense of humor and passionate for life, for psychology and for > social and human sciences will remain alive on our thoughts and hearts. > > > ? > > -- ____ Department of Education and Distance Learning, Universidade Aberta ObLID Network, LE@D-UAb R. Amial, n? 752, 4200-055 Porto, Portugal laires@uab.pt www.uab.pt www.contemcom.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190327/cadb4720/attachment.html From marilyn.fleer@monash.edu Wed Mar 27 21:51:47 2019 From: marilyn.fleer@monash.edu (Marilyn Fleer) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:51:47 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fernando Rey In-Reply-To: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> References: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: Here at Monash University, Faculty of Education, Peninsula campus we are all in mourning. We have lost an academic legend and a most wonderful human being. So many colleagues here are expressing their sorrow. Marilyn Laureate Professor Marilyn Fleer, PhD Australian Research Council *Kathleen Fitzpatrick Laureate Fellow* *Foundation Chair of Early Childhood Education and Development* Faculty of Education, *Monash University* *Honorary Research Fellow,* Faculty of Education, *University of Oxford* *Twitter*: @MarilynFleer Postal Address: Monash University, Faculty of Education, 47 ? 49 Moorooduc Highway Frankston 3199 Peninsula PO Box 527 Frankston Victoria 3199 Australia On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 at 06:34, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Dear all, > > > Fernando Gonz?lez Rey (1949-2019) > > For the CHAT community, it is a deep sorrow to inform of the > untimely death of > our colleague and friend Fernando Gonz?lez Rey on the night of March 26, > in the city of S?o Paulo, at 69 years of age. A deep and powerful live > devoted to psychology and social sciences, to understanding Vygotsky and > going > beyond his legacy; to opening new horizons regarding human personality, > qualitative methodology, motivation, sense, perezhivanie and subjectivity > from a cultural-historical approach. His ashes will be taken to Cuba, > where he was born, and as he was wish. We are sure that his strength, > integrity, sense of humor and passionate for life, for psychology and for > social and human sciences will remain alive on our thoughts and hearts. > > > ? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190328/fc99fa36/attachment.html From dkellogg60@gmail.com Thu Mar 28 14:17:12 2019 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 06:17:12 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fernando Rey In-Reply-To: References: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: I never met Fernando Gonzalez Rey, but I remember his periodization scheme for Vygotsky's work (which I completely disagreed with) and his hospital bed intervention at the Sydney ISCAR conference. His work on emotion, on Vygotsky's "Psychology of Art" and on the use of 'perezhivanie' as a unit of analysis for consciousness were much discussed in December at the ISCAR Blue Mountain retreat in Australia. He was a presence. If you think about it non-dialectically, it's pretty easy to demonstrate that the present doesn't exist, or that it is vanishingly small, or that what we think of as "present" is nothing but the immediate past (which I think was Bergson's point of view) or that what we think of as the "present" is simply an actor's prologue (which is Shakespeare's). I guess we make the present present by reflecting on it. This morning I was reflecting on that TED talk by Deb Roy which we discussed on this list eight years ago, just before I went to Sydney and started reading Fernando Gonzalez Rey. If you missed it, the TED talk is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE4ce4mexrU Going over it this morning, I realized how quaint and naive it seems, particularly in the light of Fernando Gonzalez Rey's work. It smells of the era of big data, approached atheoretically, as if all you have to do is to keep acquiring those data points and the theoretical conclusions will self-assemble. At around 2:00 Roy makes the point that the data set is 250,000 hours. What he doesn't point out is that it would take around thirty years just to listen to it, let alone analyze it. He then presents, in lieu of analysis, a visualization--space time worms. But visualization is NOT analysis, and in fact by construcing a "space time worm", all he really does is replace the real time dimension with another space dimension, which has the disadvantage (to the linguist) of being entirely unreal. At around 3:30 Roy presents a "time lapse" construction of the word "water" by his child. Although he has destroyed the context of the child's work (and thus made the construction seem at once a solitary invention and a gradual evolution), you can still see that the child's progress is exactly what the "space time worm" seems to deny: it's NOT linear at all. There are clear moments of reflection, of explicit study, of delliberate attempts to master something in the milieu, and that's what Deb Roy's data set leaves out in the visualization. I don't think much of this would have impressed Fernando Gonzalez Rey. What bothers me is that it impressed me eight years ago. Live and learn, as they say...but they don't tell you how much more there is to learn than there is to live. From the point of view of individual existence, presence just doesn't exist--fortunately, from the point of view of this list, every presence is prologue. David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 4:53 AM Luisa Aires wrote: > Sinto muito, Alfredo. > > Abra?o, > Lu?sa A. > > Alfredo Jornet Gil escreveu no dia quarta, > 27/03/2019 ?(s) 19:34: > >> Dear all, >> >> >> Fernando Gonz?lez Rey (1949-2019) >> >> For the CHAT community, it is a deep sorrow to inform of the >> untimely death of >> our colleague and friend Fernando Gonz?lez Rey on the night of March 26, >> in the city of S?o Paulo, at 69 years of age. A deep and powerful live >> devoted to psychology and social sciences, to understanding Vygotsky and >> going >> beyond his legacy; to opening new horizons regarding human personality, >> qualitative methodology, motivation, sense, perezhivanie and subjectivity >> from a cultural-historical approach. His ashes will be taken to Cuba, >> where he was born, and as he was wish. We are sure that his strength, >> integrity, sense of humor and passionate for life, for psychology and for >> social and human sciences will remain alive on our thoughts and hearts. >> >> >> ? >> >> > > -- > > ____ > Department of Education and Distance Learning, Universidade Aberta > ObLID Network, LE@D-UAb > R. Amial, n? 752, 4200-055 Porto, Portugal > laires@uab.pt > www.uab.pt > www.contemcom.org > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190329/43f8d96d/attachment-0001.html From hshonerd@gmail.com Thu Mar 28 21:02:31 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 22:02:31 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fernando Rey In-Reply-To: References: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: This business of the present and presence is interesting. I was listening to a podcast which was an interview of Daniel Kahneman, a nobel laureate in economics for his work in behavioral economics, actually the psychology of decision making. He talked of the experiencing self and the remembering self. As per David K.?s reflection that the present doesn?t really exist, then the experiencing self is the remembering self! Which is the point Gerald Edleman (another nobel laureate, but in biology) makes in his book ?The Remembered Present?. As far as presence, a primary objective of Vipassana meditation is to be present, largely through training the attention on sensation, very often the sensation of breathing. If Edleman is right, being present is reflecting on the past, or. as David K. puts it, ?...we make the present present by reflecting on it?. I like this juxtapositon of being present and making the present. Henry > On Mar 28, 2019, at 3:17 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > I never met Fernando Gonzalez Rey, but I remember his periodization scheme for Vygotsky's work (which I completely disagreed with) and his hospital bed intervention at the Sydney ISCAR conference. His work on emotion, on Vygotsky's "Psychology of Art" and on the use of 'perezhivanie' as a unit of analysis for consciousness were much discussed in December at the ISCAR Blue Mountain retreat in Australia. He was a presence. > > If you think about it non-dialectically, it's pretty easy to demonstrate that the present doesn't exist, or that it is vanishingly small, or that what we think of as "present" is nothing but the immediate past (which I think was Bergson's point of view) or that what we think of as the "present" is simply an actor's prologue (which is Shakespeare's). > > I guess we make the present present by reflecting on it. This morning I was reflecting on that TED talk by Deb Roy which we discussed on this list eight years ago, just before I went to Sydney and started reading Fernando Gonzalez Rey. If you missed it, the TED talk is here: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE4ce4mexrU > > Going over it this morning, I realized how quaint and naive it seems, particularly in the light of Fernando Gonzalez Rey's work. It smells of the era of big data, approached atheoretically, as if all you have to do is to keep acquiring those data points and the theoretical conclusions will self-assemble. > > At around 2:00 Roy makes the point that the data set is 250,000 hours. What he doesn't point out is that it would take around thirty years just to listen to it, let alone analyze it. He then presents, in lieu of analysis, a visualization--space time worms. But visualization is NOT analysis, and in fact by construcing a "space time worm", all he really does is replace the real time dimension with another space dimension, which has the disadvantage (to the linguist) of being entirely unreal. > > At around 3:30 Roy presents a "time lapse" construction of the word "water" by his child. Although he has destroyed the context of the child's work (and thus made the construction seem at once a solitary invention and a gradual evolution), you can still see that the child's progress is exactly what the "space time worm" seems to deny: it's NOT linear at all. There are clear moments of reflection, of explicit study, of delliberate attempts to master something in the milieu, and that's what Deb Roy's data set leaves out in the visualization. > > I don't think much of this would have impressed Fernando Gonzalez Rey. What bothers me is that it impressed me eight years ago. Live and learn, as they say...but they don't tell you how much more there is to learn than there is to live. From the point of view of individual existence, presence just doesn't exist--fortunately, from the point of view of this list, every presence is prologue. > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > Some e-prints available at: > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 4:53 AM Luisa Aires > wrote: > Sinto muito, Alfredo. > > Abra?o, > Lu?sa A. > > Alfredo Jornet Gil > escreveu no dia quarta, 27/03/2019 ?(s) 19:34: > Dear all, > > > > Fernando Gonz?lez Rey (1949-2019) > > For the CHAT community, it is a deep sorrow to inform of the untimely death of > our colleague and friend Fernando Gonz?lez Rey on the night of March 26, > in the city of S?o Paulo, at 69 years of age. A deep and powerful live > devoted to psychology and social sciences, to understanding Vygotsky and going > beyond his legacy; to opening new horizons regarding human personality, > qualitative methodology, motivation, sense, perezhivanie and subjectivity > from a cultural-historical approach. His ashes will be taken to Cuba, > where he was born, and as he was wish. We are sure that his strength, > integrity, sense of humor and passionate for life, for psychology and for > social and human sciences will remain alive on our thoughts and hearts. > > > ? > > > > > -- > > ____ > Department of Education and Distance Learning, Universidade Aberta > ObLID Network, LE@D-UAb > R. Amial, n? 752, 4200-055 Porto, Portugal > laires@uab.pt > www.uab.pt > www.contemcom.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190328/5b5ca4ca/attachment.html From mcole@ucsd.edu Thu Mar 28 21:12:42 2019 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 21:12:42 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fernando Rey In-Reply-To: References: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: Are you ready for remembering the future, Henry? :-) Mike On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 9:06 PM HENRY SHONERD wrote: > This business of the present and presence is interesting. I was listening > to a podcast which was an interview of Daniel Kahneman, a nobel laureate in > economics for his work in behavioral economics, actually the psychology of > decision making. He talked of the experiencing self and the remembering > self. As per David K.?s reflection that the present doesn?t really exist, > then the experiencing self is the remembering self! Which is the point > Gerald Edleman (another nobel laureate, but in biology) makes in his book > ?The Remembered Present?. As far as presence, a primary objective of > Vipassana meditation is to be present, largely through training the > attention on sensation, very often the sensation of breathing. If Edleman > is right, being present is reflecting on the past, or. as David K. puts it, > ?...we make the present present by reflecting on it?. I like this > juxtapositon of being present and making the present. > Henry > > > > On Mar 28, 2019, at 3:17 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > I never met Fernando Gonzalez Rey, but I remember his periodization scheme > for Vygotsky's work (which I completely disagreed with) and his hospital > bed intervention at the Sydney ISCAR conference. His work on emotion, on > Vygotsky's "Psychology of Art" and on the use of 'perezhivanie' as a unit > of analysis for consciousness were much discussed in December at the ISCAR > Blue Mountain retreat in Australia. He was a presence. > > If you think about it non-dialectically, it's pretty easy to demonstrate > that the present doesn't exist, or that it is vanishingly small, or that > what we think of as "present" is nothing but the immediate past (which I > think was Bergson's point of view) or that what we think of as the > "present" is simply an actor's prologue (which is Shakespeare's). > > I guess we make the present present by reflecting on it. This morning I > was reflecting on that TED talk by Deb Roy which we discussed on this list > eight years ago, just before I went to Sydney and started reading Fernando > Gonzalez Rey. If you missed it, the TED talk is here: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE4ce4mexrU > > Going over it this morning, I realized how quaint and naive it seems, > particularly in the light of Fernando Gonzalez Rey's work. It smells of the > era of big data, approached atheoretically, as if all you have to do is > to keep acquiring those data points and the theoretical conclusions will > self-assemble. > > At around 2:00 Roy makes the point that the data set is 250,000 > hours. What he doesn't point out is that it would take around thirty years > just to listen to it, let alone analyze it. He then presents, in lieu of > analysis, a visualization--space time worms. But visualization is NOT > analysis, and in fact by construcing a "space time worm", all he really > does is replace the real time dimension with another space dimension, which > has the disadvantage (to the linguist) of being entirely unreal. > > At around 3:30 Roy presents a "time lapse" construction of the word > "water" by his child. Although he has destroyed the context of the child's > work (and thus made the construction seem at once a solitary invention and > a gradual evolution), you can still see that the child's progress is > exactly what the "space time worm" seems to deny: it's NOT linear at all. > There are clear moments of reflection, of explicit study, of delliberate > attempts to master something in the milieu, and that's what Deb Roy's data > set leaves out in the visualization. > > I don't think much of this would have impressed Fernando Gonzalez Rey. > What bothers me is that it impressed me eight years ago. Live and learn, as > they say...but they don't tell you how much more there is to learn than > there is to live. From the point of view of individual existence, presence > just doesn't exist--fortunately, from the point of view of this list, every > presence is prologue. > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S > ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE > WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational > Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > Some e-prints available at: > > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 4:53 AM Luisa Aires wrote: > >> Sinto muito, Alfredo. >> >> Abra?o, >> Lu?sa A. >> >> Alfredo Jornet Gil escreveu no dia quarta, >> 27/03/2019 ?(s) 19:34: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> >>> Fernando Gonz?lez Rey (1949-2019) >>> >>> For the CHAT community, it is a deep sorrow to inform of the >>> untimely death of >>> our colleague and friend Fernando Gonz?lez Rey on the night of March 26, >>> in the city of S?o Paulo, at 69 years of age. A deep and powerful live >>> devoted to psychology and social sciences, to understanding Vygotsky and >>> going >>> beyond his legacy; to opening new horizons regarding human personality, >>> qualitative methodology, motivation, sense, perezhivanie and subjectivity >>> from a cultural-historical approach. His ashes will be taken to Cuba, >>> where he was born, and as he was wish. We are sure that his strength, >>> integrity, sense of humor and passionate for life, for psychology and for >>> social and human sciences will remain alive on our thoughts and hearts. >>> >>> >>> ? >>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> ____ >> Department of Education and Distance Learning, Universidade Aberta >> ObLID Network, LE@D-UAb >> R. Amial, n? 752, 4200-055 Porto, Portugal >> laires@uab.pt >> www.uab.pt >> www.contemcom.org >> > > -- The past is a foreign country. They do things differently there. L.P. Hartley -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190328/7829b0fb/attachment.html From nacho.montero@uam.es Fri Mar 29 01:47:11 2019 From: nacho.montero@uam.es (Nacho Montero) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 09:47:11 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] asking for information Message-ID: <01c101d4e60c$0057d820$01078860$@uam.es> Hi you all, dear Xmca members, I?m trying to write some reconstruction of last days of L.S. Vygotsky?s life (just for literary purposes). Are there any documentation on the house and neighborhood he was living in Moscow, by 1934? Thank you in advance! Nacho -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190329/c94d25ff/attachment.html From hshonerd@gmail.com Fri Mar 29 08:19:29 2019 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 09:19:29 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fernando Rey In-Reply-To: References: <1553715175663.68048@ils.uio.no> Message-ID: <71625A3D-94E0-454A-946E-960EC90CDA18@gmail.com> Yikes, Mike! Would that be what I have thought would be the future? The remembered future? Being in the future and making the future? Well history would be being in the past and making the past. Past, present or future, being ready for being in or making any of it depends on which side of the bed I get up on. :) Henry > On Mar 28, 2019, at 10:12 PM, mike cole wrote: > > Are you ready for remembering the future, Henry? > :-) > Mike > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 9:06 PM HENRY SHONERD > wrote: > This business of the present and presence is interesting. I was listening to a podcast which was an interview of Daniel Kahneman, a nobel laureate in economics for his work in behavioral economics, actually the psychology of decision making. He talked of the experiencing self and the remembering self. As per David K.?s reflection that the present doesn?t really exist, then the experiencing self is the remembering self! Which is the point Gerald Edleman (another nobel laureate, but in biology) makes in his book ?The Remembered Present?. As far as presence, a primary objective of Vipassana meditation is to be present, largely through training the attention on sensation, very often the sensation of breathing. If Edleman is right, being present is reflecting on the past, or. as David K. puts it, ?...we make the present present by reflecting on it?. I like this juxtapositon of being present and making the present. > Henry > > > >> On Mar 28, 2019, at 3:17 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: >> >> I never met Fernando Gonzalez Rey, but I remember his periodization scheme for Vygotsky's work (which I completely disagreed with) and his hospital bed intervention at the Sydney ISCAR conference. His work on emotion, on Vygotsky's "Psychology of Art" and on the use of 'perezhivanie' as a unit of analysis for consciousness were much discussed in December at the ISCAR Blue Mountain retreat in Australia. He was a presence. >> >> If you think about it non-dialectically, it's pretty easy to demonstrate that the present doesn't exist, or that it is vanishingly small, or that what we think of as "present" is nothing but the immediate past (which I think was Bergson's point of view) or that what we think of as the "present" is simply an actor's prologue (which is Shakespeare's). >> >> I guess we make the present present by reflecting on it. This morning I was reflecting on that TED talk by Deb Roy which we discussed on this list eight years ago, just before I went to Sydney and started reading Fernando Gonzalez Rey. If you missed it, the TED talk is here: >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE4ce4mexrU >> >> Going over it this morning, I realized how quaint and naive it seems, particularly in the light of Fernando Gonzalez Rey's work. It smells of the era of big data, approached atheoretically, as if all you have to do is to keep acquiring those data points and the theoretical conclusions will self-assemble. >> >> At around 2:00 Roy makes the point that the data set is 250,000 hours. What he doesn't point out is that it would take around thirty years just to listen to it, let alone analyze it. He then presents, in lieu of analysis, a visualization--space time worms. But visualization is NOT analysis, and in fact by construcing a "space time worm", all he really does is replace the real time dimension with another space dimension, which has the disadvantage (to the linguist) of being entirely unreal. >> >> At around 3:30 Roy presents a "time lapse" construction of the word "water" by his child. Although he has destroyed the context of the child's work (and thus made the construction seem at once a solitary invention and a gradual evolution), you can still see that the child's progress is exactly what the "space time worm" seems to deny: it's NOT linear at all. There are clear moments of reflection, of explicit study, of delliberate attempts to master something in the milieu, and that's what Deb Roy's data set leaves out in the visualization. >> >> I don't think much of this would have impressed Fernando Gonzalez Rey. What bothers me is that it impressed me eight years ago. Live and learn, as they say...but they don't tell you how much more there is to learn than there is to live. From the point of view of individual existence, presence just doesn't exist--fortunately, from the point of view of this list, every presence is prologue. >> >> David Kellogg >> Sangmyung University >> >> New Article; >> >> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> Some e-prints available at: >> >> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 4:53 AM Luisa Aires > wrote: >> Sinto muito, Alfredo. >> >> Abra?o, >> Lu?sa A. >> >> Alfredo Jornet Gil > escreveu no dia quarta, 27/03/2019 ?(s) 19:34: >> Dear all, >> >> >> >> Fernando Gonz?lez Rey (1949-2019) >> >> For the CHAT community, it is a deep sorrow to inform of the untimely death of >> our colleague and friend Fernando Gonz?lez Rey on the night of March 26, >> in the city of S?o Paulo, at 69 years of age. A deep and powerful live >> devoted to psychology and social sciences, to understanding Vygotsky and going >> beyond his legacy; to opening new horizons regarding human personality, >> qualitative methodology, motivation, sense, perezhivanie and subjectivity >> from a cultural-historical approach. His ashes will be taken to Cuba, >> where he was born, and as he was wish. We are sure that his strength, >> integrity, sense of humor and passionate for life, for psychology and for >> social and human sciences will remain alive on our thoughts and hearts. >> >> >> ? >> >> >> > >> >> -- >> >> ____ >> Department of Education and Distance Learning, Universidade Aberta >> ObLID Network, LE@D-UAb >> R. Amial, n? 752, 4200-055 Porto, Portugal >> laires@uab.pt >> www.uab.pt >> www.contemcom.org > -- > The past is a foreign country. They do things differently there. > L.P. Hartley -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190329/579faa5c/attachment.html From wagner.schmit@gmail.com Fri Mar 29 10:30:14 2019 From: wagner.schmit@gmail.com (Wagner Luiz Schmit) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:30:14 -0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] ZPD Message-ID: Hello, What is the difference between Zone of proximal development (ZPD) and Potential Level of Development (PLD)? In thinking and speech (in the collected works v1 in English) Vygotsky defines ZPD and in page 209. It seems to me that he writes about the PLD also in page 211. At page 209 PLD seems to be what children can do with the guidance of an adult. And that ZDP is the exact same thing. At page 211 PLD can be understood as something that can enter the ZPD, so not the same as ZPD, so something that children can learn soon, but can not do even with help now (ZPD) and surely not alone. For me this makes more sense, since in this case the PLD would match the Social Situation of Development (SSD - collected works v5 pg 198), and the ZPD would be what is between the PLD and the Actual Level of Development (ALD). In other words the ZPD is the dialectical movement towards the devir, the PLD/SSD. But at the same time in Mind in society (page 86) the same text is edited in a different way, stating that the PLD is what is written in page 209 from above, but, that the ZPD is what is between ALD and this PLD, i.e., what is between what children can do with help and what they can do alone. What exactly is this "between"? Sorry if the answer seem to be obvious, but I am a bit lost here. All the best, Wagner Luiz Schmit UNESP - Brazil -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190329/6d5d4c07/attachment.html From marc.clara@gmail.com Fri Mar 29 13:18:02 2019 From: marc.clara@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Clar=C3=A0?=) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 21:18:02 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Wagner and other colleagues, I'll try to briefly share my interpretation about this issue. In my understanding, the formation of a ZDP implies the intellectual (or meaningful) imitation (p.210) by the child of a meaning that has a level of generality at which the child cannot form meanings. For example, an adult publicly form the "true concept" of "living being", and a child at the stage of "complexes" forms an intellectual imitation of that meaning (which will be a "functional equivalent" of it). So, the child forms a meaning with a level of generality that is beyond her actual level of development. This enables a dialectic tension between this meaning, formed through intellectual imitation, and the meanings that the child can form spontaneously. This dialectic tension between meanings of different levels of generality generates a process of self-development (p.229) leading to the structural emergence of a new level of generality (p.231), at which the child will be now able to form meanings spontaneously. So, when a child intellectually imitates a meaning at a level of generality at which she cannot form meanings spontaneously, this meaning shows the PLD of the child: the next level of generality at which the child will be able to spontaneously form meanings. This meaning enters into a dialectical tension with meanings that the child is already able to form spontaneously (her ALD). This dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD is what pushes development and what turns the PLD of the child into her next ALD. I have further developed this interpretation in the following paper: Clar?, M. (2017). How Instruction Influences Conceptual Development: Vygotsky?s Theory Revisited. *Educational Psychologist, 52(1), *50-62, DOI:10.1080/00461520.2016.1221765 (I can privately sent the manuscript if needed) Best, Marc Clar? University of Lleida Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit del dia dv., 29 de mar? 2019 a les 18:34: > Hello, > > What is the difference between Zone of proximal development (ZPD) and > Potential Level of Development (PLD)? > > In thinking and speech (in the collected works v1 in English) Vygotsky > defines ZPD and in page 209. It seems to me that he writes about the PLD > also in page 211. > > At page 209 PLD seems to be what children can do with the guidance of an > adult. And that ZDP is the exact same thing. > > At page 211 PLD can be understood as something that can enter the ZPD, so > not the same as ZPD, so something that children can learn soon, but can not > do even with help now (ZPD) and surely not alone. For me this makes more > sense, since in this case the PLD would match the Social Situation of > Development (SSD - collected works v5 pg 198), and the ZPD would be what is > between the PLD and the Actual Level of Development (ALD). In other words > the ZPD is the dialectical movement towards the devir, the PLD/SSD. > > But at the same time in Mind in society (page 86) the same text is edited > in a different way, stating that the PLD is what is written in page > 209 from above, but, that the ZPD is what is between ALD and this PLD, > i.e., what is between what children can do with help and what they can do > alone. What exactly is this "between"? > > Sorry if the answer seem to be obvious, but I am a bit lost here. > > All the best, > > Wagner Luiz Schmit > UNESP - Brazil > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190329/dfeeae84/attachment.html From dkellogg60@gmail.com Fri Mar 29 14:50:30 2019 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 06:50:30 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In his introduction to the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English Collected Works), Vygotsky uses "the zone of its (the critical age's) proximal development" to refer to...the subsequent age level, that is, preschool. This is quite consistent with all of the other things we know about the ZPD--it is measured in years (and not months or moments), those years are developmental years and not "passport" (i.e. calendar) years, and it is a diagnostic and not a pedagogical device. Although both are measured in (develomental) years, a "level" is not the same thing as a "zone": the child functioning at the level of two developmental years is not the same thing as the zone of two developmental years which separates that child from the neonate. The level is the age period at which the child can function. The zone is the distance between two levels, e.g. the distance between the child at (developmental age) three and the child at (developmental) preschool age. The level is a milestone, but the zone is the distance between milestones. The real level or real zone is not the same thing as the potential zone or potential level, precisely because the internalization of a function (vraschivaniya) takes years. If we find, for example, that it is literally true that the function the child can realize with assistance today is a function that the child can realize without assistance tomorrow--literally within twenty-four hours of instruction--all we have demonstrated is that this function is part of the actual level of development and not the next, or proximal, one. This is why, in order to make the ZPD into a diagnostic and not a pedagogical tool, we need to know the pedological age levels whose zones, measured in years, it was designed to diagnose. We also need some way of diagnosing them that does not depend either on the calendar (passport years) or on the hated Binet-Simon tasks which Vygotsky used and criticized and which were later used to criticize him. These were what the ZPD was designed to replace. (It seems to me that these two problems might make good special issues for MCA! I wonder....) David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 5:22 AM Marc Clar? wrote: > Dear Wagner and other colleagues, > I'll try to briefly share my interpretation about this issue. In my > understanding, the formation of a ZDP implies the intellectual (or > meaningful) imitation (p.210) by the child of a meaning that has a level of > generality at which the child cannot form meanings. For example, an adult > publicly form the "true concept" of "living being", and a child at the > stage of "complexes" forms an intellectual imitation of that meaning (which > will be a "functional equivalent" of it). So, the child forms a meaning > with a level of generality that is beyond her actual level of development. > This enables a dialectic tension between this meaning, formed through > intellectual imitation, and the meanings that the child can form > spontaneously. This dialectic tension between meanings of different levels > of generality generates a process of self-development (p.229) leading to > the structural emergence of a new level of generality (p.231), at which the > child will be now able to form meanings spontaneously. > So, when a child intellectually imitates a meaning at a level of > generality at which she cannot form meanings spontaneously, this meaning > shows the PLD of the child: the next level of generality at which the child > will be able to spontaneously form meanings. This meaning enters into a > dialectical tension with meanings that the child is already able to form > spontaneously (her ALD). This dialectical tension between the PLD and the > ALD is what pushes development and what turns the PLD of the child into her > next ALD. > I have further developed this interpretation in the following paper: > > Clar?, M. (2017). How Instruction Influences Conceptual Development: > Vygotsky?s Theory Revisited. *Educational Psychologist, 52(1), *50-62, > DOI:10.1080/00461520.2016.1221765 > > (I can privately sent the manuscript if needed) > > Best, > Marc Clar? > University of Lleida > > > Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit del dia dv., 29 > de mar? 2019 a les 18:34: > >> Hello, >> >> What is the difference between Zone of proximal development (ZPD) and >> Potential Level of Development (PLD)? >> >> In thinking and speech (in the collected works v1 in English) Vygotsky >> defines ZPD and in page 209. It seems to me that he writes about the PLD >> also in page 211. >> >> At page 209 PLD seems to be what children can do with the guidance of an >> adult. And that ZDP is the exact same thing. >> >> At page 211 PLD can be understood as something that can enter the ZPD, so >> not the same as ZPD, so something that children can learn soon, but can not >> do even with help now (ZPD) and surely not alone. For me this makes more >> sense, since in this case the PLD would match the Social Situation of >> Development (SSD - collected works v5 pg 198), and the ZPD would be what is >> between the PLD and the Actual Level of Development (ALD). In other words >> the ZPD is the dialectical movement towards the devir, the PLD/SSD. >> >> But at the same time in Mind in society (page 86) the same text is edited >> in a different way, stating that the PLD is what is written in page >> 209 from above, but, that the ZPD is what is between ALD and this PLD, >> i.e., what is between what children can do with help and what they can do >> alone. What exactly is this "between"? >> >> Sorry if the answer seem to be obvious, but I am a bit lost here. >> >> All the best, >> >> Wagner Luiz Schmit >> UNESP - Brazil >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190330/ff0536b3/attachment.html From dkellogg60@gmail.com Fri Mar 29 15:07:11 2019 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 07:07:11 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] The Presence of the Present Message-ID: Last week I took the airport express from Incheon International Airport back to Seoul Station. When I got out at Seoul Station and took the elevator to transfer to the Number One subway line, I got my carry- on luggage stuck in the door, and I was startled to hear the robotically sweet robotically feminine voice in the elevator say: "The doors close. The doors open. The doors close. The doors open. The doors close. The doors close. The doors open. The doors close. The doors open. The doors open. The doors close..." Three things occurred to me in quick succession while I was trying to disengage my carry-on carrion from the vulture jaws of the elevator door. First of all, the robotically sweet robotically feminine quality of the voice had nothing to do with mechanical speech synthesis (the voice is actually based on a real human voice, as it happens it is the voice of our current Foreign Minister, Kang Kyeong-hwa, who was the announcer on the Seoul subway when I first moved to Seoul); it has to do with the ability of the voice to repeat itself without any change in intonation or underlying frustration level. Secondly, the grammar is not actually wrong, but it is not canonical; i.e. for statistical reasons it means something rather different than the presence of the present. In English, we say: "I like Seoul. I love Seoul. I want the Number One line. I wish to transfer." We also say, at our peril: "I'm liking Seoul. I'm lovin' Seoul (c.f. the now discontinued "i'm lovin' it" campaign at McDonald's). I'm wanting the Number One line (Indian English). I'm wishing to transfer (ditto)." But the meaning is rather different. This is because mechanical--or, as Halliday would put it, material--processes canonically take the "present in the present" tense: "The doors are opening" and "The doors are closing". But psychological--or, as Halliday would put it, mental--processes canonically take the "simple present" tense: "I like Seoul". Canonically just means "more often than not". But of course canons are cultural, and they need to be explained. And that brings me to the third thing which occurred to me (rather more slowly than the first two) as a consequence (though not actually concurrently with) my struggle with the elevator door. It's this: mental processes are what they are because they do not have any clear beginning or endpoint that is shareable and observable to others; their presence is instead made present by reflection upon psychological experience. That is why we say "I wish" and not "I am wishing". That is why we leave them in the simple present and do not typically try to express them in the "present in the present" (i.e. "present continuous", although actually they are neither present nor continuous). In this way, English grammar expresses the very Russian notion of "perezhivanie". David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190330/0b51c67b/attachment.html From dkellogg60@gmail.com Fri Mar 29 15:22:10 2019 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 07:22:10 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: asking for information In-Reply-To: <01c101d4e60c$0057d820$01078860$@uam.es> References: <01c101d4e60c$0057d820$01078860$@uam.es> Message-ID: Nacho: I think the last days of most dying people are quite sleepy and uninteresting affairs. According to his letters (the Puzyrei collection excerpted in 2007 in the Journal of Russian and Eastern European Psychology and the more recent collection in German edited by Ruckreim), he died in a sanatorium. But the last months of Vygotsky were full of events, including a wonderful lecture on thinking in the school child, delivered in Leningrad, at the Herzen Pedagogical Institute, a little over a month before he died. He describes riding the train between Moscow and Leningrad as a way of discriminating between the immediate and ultimate goal of an action; he must have spent a lot of time on that train. Mike once speculated that Vygotsky worked himself to death deliberately, i.e. "Thinking and Speech" is not simply the world's most interesting suicide note, it is the actual weapon that was used in the crime. I am not so sure about Vygotsky's motivation: one of the last things he wrote was "amor fati", which he wrongly ascribed to Nietzsche rather than Boethius. LSV was taking on new assignments right up to the very end, you know (e.g. being appointed to head the All Union Institute of Experimental Psychology, taking on research with chimpanzees, and preparing a conference paper for Kharkhov). But Mike is surely right about one thing: the work hastened his death, and, of course, his immortality, in a way that the sanatorium could not. David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 5:48 PM Nacho Montero wrote: > Hi you all, dear Xmca members, > > I?m trying to write some reconstruction of last days of L.S. Vygotsky?s > life (just for literary purposes). Are there any documentation on the house > and neighborhood he was living in Moscow, by 1934? > > Thank you in advance! > > Nacho > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190330/f00a80ba/attachment.html From wagner.schmit@gmail.com Fri Mar 29 18:32:41 2019 From: wagner.schmit@gmail.com (Wagner Luiz Schmit) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 22:32:41 -0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello, So there is only two "concepts", the actual level of development and the zone or level of potential development, both measured in year because of a better way to measure them, right? Usually I see ZPD (one concept) defined as the distance between actual level of development (another concept) and potential level of development (yet another concept). And now the Kellogg points out the measure in years, I notice that almost never I saw it used this way, usually it is as if ZPD happens in a meeting, a class, a play... But if it measures the development of mental functions, them years make a lot more of sense. And what about the relationship between ZPD and Social Situation of Development? I missed the point too much? Wagner On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 18:53 David Kellogg wrote: > In his introduction to the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English > Collected Works), Vygotsky uses "the zone of its (the critical age's) > proximal development" to refer to...the subsequent age level, that is, > preschool. This is quite consistent with all of the other things we know > about the ZPD--it is measured in years (and not months or moments), those > years are developmental years and not "passport" (i.e. calendar) years, and > it is a diagnostic and not a pedagogical device. > > Although both are measured in (develomental) years, a "level" is not the > same thing as a "zone": the child functioning at the level of two > developmental years is not the same thing as the zone of two > developmental years which separates that child from the neonate. The level > is the age period at which the child can function. The zone is the distance > between two levels, e.g. the distance between the child at (developmental > age) three and the child at (developmental) preschool age. The level is a > milestone, but the zone is the distance between milestones. > > The real level or real zone is not the same thing as the potential zone or > potential level, precisely because the internalization of a function > (vraschivaniya) takes years. If we find, for example, that it is literally > true that the function the child can realize with assistance today is a > function that the child can realize without assistance > tomorrow--literally within twenty-four hours of instruction--all we > have demonstrated is that this function is part of the actual level of > development and not the next, or proximal, one. > > This is why, in order to make the ZPD into a diagnostic and not a > pedagogical tool, we need to know the pedological age levels whose zones, > measured in years, it was designed to diagnose. We also need some way of > diagnosing them that does not depend either on the calendar (passport > years) or on the hated Binet-Simon tasks which Vygotsky used and criticized > and which were later used to criticize him. These were what the ZPD was > designed to replace. > > (It seems to me that these two problems might make good special issues for > MCA! I wonder....) > > David Kellogg > Sangmyung University > > New Article; > > David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S > ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE > WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational > Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > Some e-prints available at: > > > https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 > > > > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 5:22 AM Marc Clar? wrote: > >> Dear Wagner and other colleagues, >> I'll try to briefly share my interpretation about this issue. In my >> understanding, the formation of a ZDP implies the intellectual (or >> meaningful) imitation (p.210) by the child of a meaning that has a level of >> generality at which the child cannot form meanings. For example, an adult >> publicly form the "true concept" of "living being", and a child at the >> stage of "complexes" forms an intellectual imitation of that meaning (which >> will be a "functional equivalent" of it). So, the child forms a meaning >> with a level of generality that is beyond her actual level of development. >> This enables a dialectic tension between this meaning, formed through >> intellectual imitation, and the meanings that the child can form >> spontaneously. This dialectic tension between meanings of different levels >> of generality generates a process of self-development (p.229) leading to >> the structural emergence of a new level of generality (p.231), at which the >> child will be now able to form meanings spontaneously. >> So, when a child intellectually imitates a meaning at a level of >> generality at which she cannot form meanings spontaneously, this meaning >> shows the PLD of the child: the next level of generality at which the child >> will be able to spontaneously form meanings. This meaning enters into a >> dialectical tension with meanings that the child is already able to form >> spontaneously (her ALD). This dialectical tension between the PLD and the >> ALD is what pushes development and what turns the PLD of the child into her >> next ALD. >> I have further developed this interpretation in the following paper: >> >> Clar?, M. (2017). How Instruction Influences Conceptual Development: >> Vygotsky?s Theory Revisited. *Educational Psychologist, 52(1), *50-62, >> DOI:10.1080/00461520.2016.1221765 >> >> (I can privately sent the manuscript if needed) >> >> Best, >> Marc Clar? >> University of Lleida >> >> >> Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit del dia dv., 29 >> de mar? 2019 a les 18:34: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> What is the difference between Zone of proximal development (ZPD) and >>> Potential Level of Development (PLD)? >>> >>> In thinking and speech (in the collected works v1 in English) Vygotsky >>> defines ZPD and in page 209. It seems to me that he writes about the PLD >>> also in page 211. >>> >>> At page 209 PLD seems to be what children can do with the guidance of an >>> adult. And that ZDP is the exact same thing. >>> >>> At page 211 PLD can be understood as something that can enter the ZPD, >>> so not the same as ZPD, so something that children can learn soon, but can >>> not do even with help now (ZPD) and surely not alone. For me this makes >>> more sense, since in this case the PLD would match the Social Situation of >>> Development (SSD - collected works v5 pg 198), and the ZPD would be what is >>> between the PLD and the Actual Level of Development (ALD). In other words >>> the ZPD is the dialectical movement towards the devir, the PLD/SSD. >>> >>> But at the same time in Mind in society (page 86) the same text is >>> edited in a different way, stating that the PLD is what is written in page >>> 209 from above, but, that the ZPD is what is between ALD and this PLD, >>> i.e., what is between what children can do with help and what they can do >>> alone. What exactly is this "between"? >>> >>> Sorry if the answer seem to be obvious, but I am a bit lost here. >>> >>> All the best, >>> >>> Wagner Luiz Schmit >>> UNESP - Brazil >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190329/bed888f4/attachment.html From marc.clara@gmail.com Sat Mar 30 01:58:44 2019 From: marc.clara@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Clar=C3=A0?=) Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 09:58:44 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Wagner, In my view, the ZPD is the dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD. So the ZPD, in my understanding, is neither the PLD nor the ALD, but the dialectical tension (or distance) between the two, which is what pushes conceptual development through a process of self-development. In my view, the Social Situation of Development is what makes possible this dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD. In order to enable this tension, the child must intellectually imitate a meaning at a level of generality which is beyond her ALD. This is only possible if this meaning is formed by others in the Social Situation of Development of the child (a system of social relationships involving the child). So the Social Situation makes the PLD available to the child; that is, the Social Situation offers a meaning which is formed at a level of generality in which the child cannot form meanings, and then the child intellectually imitates this meaning, and this enables a dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD (a ZPD). All the best, Marc. Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit del dia ds., 30 de mar? 2019 a les 2:35: > Hello, > > So there is only two "concepts", the actual level of development and the > zone or level of potential development, both measured in year because of a > better way to measure them, right? > > Usually I see ZPD (one concept) defined as the distance between actual > level of development (another concept) and potential level of development > (yet another concept). > > And now the Kellogg points out the measure in years, I notice that almost > never I saw it used this way, usually it is as if ZPD happens in a meeting, > a class, a play... But if it measures the development of mental functions, > them years make a lot more of sense. > > And what about the relationship between ZPD and Social Situation of > Development? I missed the point too much? > > Wagner > > On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 18:53 David Kellogg wrote: > >> In his introduction to the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English >> Collected Works), Vygotsky uses "the zone of its (the critical age's) >> proximal development" to refer to...the subsequent age level, that is, >> preschool. This is quite consistent with all of the other things we know >> about the ZPD--it is measured in years (and not months or moments), those >> years are developmental years and not "passport" (i.e. calendar) years, and >> it is a diagnostic and not a pedagogical device. >> >> Although both are measured in (develomental) years, a "level" is not the >> same thing as a "zone": the child functioning at the level of two >> developmental years is not the same thing as the zone of two >> developmental years which separates that child from the neonate. The level >> is the age period at which the child can function. The zone is the distance >> between two levels, e.g. the distance between the child at (developmental >> age) three and the child at (developmental) preschool age. The level is a >> milestone, but the zone is the distance between milestones. >> >> The real level or real zone is not the same thing as the potential zone >> or potential level, precisely because the internalization of a function >> (vraschivaniya) takes years. If we find, for example, that it is literally >> true that the function the child can realize with assistance today is a >> function that the child can realize without assistance >> tomorrow--literally within twenty-four hours of instruction--all we >> have demonstrated is that this function is part of the actual level of >> development and not the next, or proximal, one. >> >> This is why, in order to make the ZPD into a diagnostic and not a >> pedagogical tool, we need to know the pedological age levels whose zones, >> measured in years, it was designed to diagnose. We also need some way of >> diagnosing them that does not depend either on the calendar (passport >> years) or on the hated Binet-Simon tasks which Vygotsky used and criticized >> and which were later used to criticize him. These were what the ZPD was >> designed to replace. >> >> (It seems to me that these two problems might make good special issues >> for MCA! I wonder....) >> >> David Kellogg >> Sangmyung University >> >> New Article; >> >> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S >> ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE >> WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational >> Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> >> >> Some e-prints available at: >> >> >> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 5:22 AM Marc Clar? wrote: >> >>> Dear Wagner and other colleagues, >>> I'll try to briefly share my interpretation about this issue. In my >>> understanding, the formation of a ZDP implies the intellectual (or >>> meaningful) imitation (p.210) by the child of a meaning that has a level of >>> generality at which the child cannot form meanings. For example, an adult >>> publicly form the "true concept" of "living being", and a child at the >>> stage of "complexes" forms an intellectual imitation of that meaning (which >>> will be a "functional equivalent" of it). So, the child forms a meaning >>> with a level of generality that is beyond her actual level of development. >>> This enables a dialectic tension between this meaning, formed through >>> intellectual imitation, and the meanings that the child can form >>> spontaneously. This dialectic tension between meanings of different levels >>> of generality generates a process of self-development (p.229) leading to >>> the structural emergence of a new level of generality (p.231), at which the >>> child will be now able to form meanings spontaneously. >>> So, when a child intellectually imitates a meaning at a level of >>> generality at which she cannot form meanings spontaneously, this meaning >>> shows the PLD of the child: the next level of generality at which the child >>> will be able to spontaneously form meanings. This meaning enters into a >>> dialectical tension with meanings that the child is already able to form >>> spontaneously (her ALD). This dialectical tension between the PLD and the >>> ALD is what pushes development and what turns the PLD of the child into her >>> next ALD. >>> I have further developed this interpretation in the following paper: >>> >>> Clar?, M. (2017). How Instruction Influences Conceptual Development: >>> Vygotsky?s Theory Revisited. *Educational Psychologist, 52(1), *50-62, >>> DOI:10.1080/00461520.2016.1221765 >>> >>> (I can privately sent the manuscript if needed) >>> >>> Best, >>> Marc Clar? >>> University of Lleida >>> >>> >>> Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit del dia dv., >>> 29 de mar? 2019 a les 18:34: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> What is the difference between Zone of proximal development (ZPD) and >>>> Potential Level of Development (PLD)? >>>> >>>> In thinking and speech (in the collected works v1 in English) Vygotsky >>>> defines ZPD and in page 209. It seems to me that he writes about the PLD >>>> also in page 211. >>>> >>>> At page 209 PLD seems to be what children can do with the guidance of >>>> an adult. And that ZDP is the exact same thing. >>>> >>>> At page 211 PLD can be understood as something that can enter the ZPD, >>>> so not the same as ZPD, so something that children can learn soon, but can >>>> not do even with help now (ZPD) and surely not alone. For me this makes >>>> more sense, since in this case the PLD would match the Social Situation of >>>> Development (SSD - collected works v5 pg 198), and the ZPD would be what is >>>> between the PLD and the Actual Level of Development (ALD). In other words >>>> the ZPD is the dialectical movement towards the devir, the PLD/SSD. >>>> >>>> But at the same time in Mind in society (page 86) the same text is >>>> edited in a different way, stating that the PLD is what is written in page >>>> 209 from above, but, that the ZPD is what is between ALD and this PLD, >>>> i.e., what is between what children can do with help and what they can do >>>> alone. What exactly is this "between"? >>>> >>>> Sorry if the answer seem to be obvious, but I am a bit lost here. >>>> >>>> All the best, >>>> >>>> Wagner Luiz Schmit >>>> UNESP - Brazil >>>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190330/e7d1ff5e/attachment.html From wagner.schmit@gmail.com Sat Mar 30 04:04:49 2019 From: wagner.schmit@gmail.com (Wagner Luiz Schmit) Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 08:04:49 -0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Marc. On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 06:02 Marc Clar? wrote: > Dear Wagner, > In my view, the ZPD is the dialectical tension between the PLD and the > ALD. So the ZPD, in my understanding, is neither the PLD nor the ALD, but > the dialectical tension (or distance) between the two, which is what pushes > conceptual development through a process of self-development. > In my view, the Social Situation of Development is what makes possible > this dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD. In order to enable > this tension, the child must intellectually imitate a meaning at a level of > generality which is beyond her ALD. This is only possible if this meaning > is formed by others in the Social Situation of Development of the child (a > system of social relationships involving the child). So the Social > Situation makes the PLD available to the child; that is, the Social > Situation offers a meaning which is formed at a level of generality in > which the child cannot form meanings, and then the child intellectually > imitates this meaning, and this enables a dialectical tension between the > PLD and the ALD (a ZPD). > All the best, > Marc. > > > Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit del dia ds., 30 > de mar? 2019 a les 2:35: > >> Hello, >> >> So there is only two "concepts", the actual level of development and the >> zone or level of potential development, both measured in year because of a >> better way to measure them, right? >> >> Usually I see ZPD (one concept) defined as the distance between actual >> level of development (another concept) and potential level of development >> (yet another concept). >> >> And now the Kellogg points out the measure in years, I notice that almost >> never I saw it used this way, usually it is as if ZPD happens in a meeting, >> a class, a play... But if it measures the development of mental functions, >> them years make a lot more of sense. >> >> And what about the relationship between ZPD and Social Situation of >> Development? I missed the point too much? >> >> Wagner >> >> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 18:53 David Kellogg wrote: >> >>> In his introduction to the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English >>> Collected Works), Vygotsky uses "the zone of its (the critical age's) >>> proximal development" to refer to...the subsequent age level, that is, >>> preschool. This is quite consistent with all of the other things we know >>> about the ZPD--it is measured in years (and not months or moments), those >>> years are developmental years and not "passport" (i.e. calendar) years, and >>> it is a diagnostic and not a pedagogical device. >>> >>> Although both are measured in (develomental) years, a "level" is not >>> the same thing as a "zone": the child functioning at the level of two >>> developmental years is not the same thing as the zone of two >>> developmental years which separates that child from the neonate. The level >>> is the age period at which the child can function. The zone is the distance >>> between two levels, e.g. the distance between the child at (developmental >>> age) three and the child at (developmental) preschool age. The level is a >>> milestone, but the zone is the distance between milestones. >>> >>> The real level or real zone is not the same thing as the potential zone >>> or potential level, precisely because the internalization of a function >>> (vraschivaniya) takes years. If we find, for example, that it is literally >>> true that the function the child can realize with assistance today is a >>> function that the child can realize without assistance >>> tomorrow--literally within twenty-four hours of instruction--all we >>> have demonstrated is that this function is part of the actual level of >>> development and not the next, or proximal, one. >>> >>> This is why, in order to make the ZPD into a diagnostic and not a >>> pedagogical tool, we need to know the pedological age levels whose zones, >>> measured in years, it was designed to diagnose. We also need some way of >>> diagnosing them that does not depend either on the calendar (passport >>> years) or on the hated Binet-Simon tasks which Vygotsky used and criticized >>> and which were later used to criticize him. These were what the ZPD was >>> designed to replace. >>> >>> (It seems to me that these two problems might make good special issues >>> for MCA! I wonder....) >>> >>> David Kellogg >>> Sangmyung University >>> >>> New Article; >>> >>> David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S >>> ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE >>> WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational >>> Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>> >>> >>> >>> Some e-prints available at: >>> >>> >>> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 5:22 AM Marc Clar? wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Wagner and other colleagues, >>>> I'll try to briefly share my interpretation about this issue. In my >>>> understanding, the formation of a ZDP implies the intellectual (or >>>> meaningful) imitation (p.210) by the child of a meaning that has a level of >>>> generality at which the child cannot form meanings. For example, an adult >>>> publicly form the "true concept" of "living being", and a child at the >>>> stage of "complexes" forms an intellectual imitation of that meaning (which >>>> will be a "functional equivalent" of it). So, the child forms a meaning >>>> with a level of generality that is beyond her actual level of development. >>>> This enables a dialectic tension between this meaning, formed through >>>> intellectual imitation, and the meanings that the child can form >>>> spontaneously. This dialectic tension between meanings of different levels >>>> of generality generates a process of self-development (p.229) leading to >>>> the structural emergence of a new level of generality (p.231), at which the >>>> child will be now able to form meanings spontaneously. >>>> So, when a child intellectually imitates a meaning at a level of >>>> generality at which she cannot form meanings spontaneously, this meaning >>>> shows the PLD of the child: the next level of generality at which the child >>>> will be able to spontaneously form meanings. This meaning enters into a >>>> dialectical tension with meanings that the child is already able to form >>>> spontaneously (her ALD). This dialectical tension between the PLD and the >>>> ALD is what pushes development and what turns the PLD of the child into her >>>> next ALD. >>>> I have further developed this interpretation in the following paper: >>>> >>>> Clar?, M. (2017). How Instruction Influences Conceptual Development: >>>> Vygotsky?s Theory Revisited. *Educational Psychologist, 52(1), *50-62, >>>> DOI:10.1080/00461520.2016.1221765 >>>> >>>> (I can privately sent the manuscript if needed) >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Marc Clar? >>>> University of Lleida >>>> >>>> >>>> Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit del dia dv., >>>> 29 de mar? 2019 a les 18:34: >>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> What is the difference between Zone of proximal development (ZPD) and >>>>> Potential Level of Development (PLD)? >>>>> >>>>> In thinking and speech (in the collected works v1 in English) Vygotsky >>>>> defines ZPD and in page 209. It seems to me that he writes about the PLD >>>>> also in page 211. >>>>> >>>>> At page 209 PLD seems to be what children can do with the guidance of >>>>> an adult. And that ZDP is the exact same thing. >>>>> >>>>> At page 211 PLD can be understood as something that can enter the ZPD, >>>>> so not the same as ZPD, so something that children can learn soon, but can >>>>> not do even with help now (ZPD) and surely not alone. For me this makes >>>>> more sense, since in this case the PLD would match the Social Situation of >>>>> Development (SSD - collected works v5 pg 198), and the ZPD would be what is >>>>> between the PLD and the Actual Level of Development (ALD). In other words >>>>> the ZPD is the dialectical movement towards the devir, the PLD/SSD. >>>>> >>>>> But at the same time in Mind in society (page 86) the same text is >>>>> edited in a different way, stating that the PLD is what is written in page >>>>> 209 from above, but, that the ZPD is what is between ALD and this PLD, >>>>> i.e., what is between what children can do with help and what they can do >>>>> alone. What exactly is this "between"? >>>>> >>>>> Sorry if the answer seem to be obvious, but I am a bit lost here. >>>>> >>>>> All the best, >>>>> >>>>> Wagner Luiz Schmit >>>>> UNESP - Brazil >>>>> >>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190330/d46615fa/attachment.html From simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za Sun Mar 31 11:32:51 2019 From: simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za (Simangele Mayisela) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 18:32:51 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA8013397A678@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> Dear Wagner, marc and David Thank for affording us moment to check what we think we have grasped and got to know. I may be having a primitive understanding of the three concepts, have been consolidated from reading your communique. I think the PLD level of development is socially determined, however it is also determined by the biological, i.e. phenotypical ? which I think it is the one that is determined by years ? since generally human being can develop certain mental skills at particular age ranges, although there are exceptions to the norm ? based on cultural exposure of the child. The ADL is determined as an aftermath ?once the child had acquired he skill. It can be determined earlier or later than the PLD depending on whether the child receives social intervention or not, or in the worst case scenario, it may not even come to fruition if there is no stimulation at all. The ZPD is therefore what happens between the PLD (the goal the teacher is working towards through activity) and the ALD (the acquisition of the skills, which can be measured as whether adequate or not ? novice or expert depending on where one is based) to determine further intervention for remaining ZPD to improve the current ALD towards the PLD. All the best, R, S?ma Dr. Simangele Mayisela Senior Lecturer, Ed. Psychologist Department of Psychology, SHCD. Wits University, Johannesburg Tel: 011 717 4529 From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Marc Clar? Sent: 30 March 2019 10:59 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD Dear Wagner, In my view, the ZPD is the dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD. So the ZPD, in my understanding, is neither the PLD nor the ALD, but the dialectical tension (or distance) between the two, which is what pushes conceptual development through a process of self-development. In my view, the Social Situation of Development is what makes possible this dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD. In order to enable this tension, the child must intellectually imitate a meaning at a level of generality which is beyond her ALD. This is only possible if this meaning is formed by others in the Social Situation of Development of the child (a system of social relationships involving the child). So the Social Situation makes the PLD available to the child; that is, the Social Situation offers a meaning which is formed at a level of generality in which the child cannot form meanings, and then the child intellectually imitates this meaning, and this enables a dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD (a ZPD). All the best, Marc. Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit > del dia ds., 30 de mar? 2019 a les 2:35: Hello, So there is only two "concepts", the actual level of development and the zone or level of potential development, both measured in year because of a better way to measure them, right? Usually I see ZPD (one concept) defined as the distance between actual level of development (another concept) and potential level of development (yet another concept). And now the Kellogg points out the measure in years, I notice that almost never I saw it used this way, usually it is as if ZPD happens in a meeting, a class, a play... But if it measures the development of mental functions, them years make a lot more of sense. And what about the relationship between ZPD and Social Situation of Development? I missed the point too much? Wagner On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 18:53 David Kellogg > wrote: In his introduction to the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English Collected Works), Vygotsky uses "the zone of its (the critical age's) proximal development" to refer to...the subsequent age level, that is, preschool. This is quite consistent with all of the other things we know about the ZPD--it is measured in years (and not months or moments), those years are developmental years and not "passport" (i.e. calendar) years, and it is a diagnostic and not a pedagogical device. Although both are measured in (develomental) years, a "level" is not the same thing as a "zone": the child functioning at the level of two developmental years is not the same thing as the zone of two developmental years which separates that child from the neonate. The level is the age period at which the child can function. The zone is the distance between two levels, e.g. the distance between the child at (developmental age) three and the child at (developmental) preschool age. The level is a milestone, but the zone is the distance between milestones. The real level or real zone is not the same thing as the potential zone or potential level, precisely because the internalization of a function (vraschivaniya) takes years. If we find, for example, that it is literally true that the function the child can realize with assistance today is a function that the child can realize without assistance tomorrow--literally within twenty-four hours of instruction--all we have demonstrated is that this function is part of the actual level of development and not the next, or proximal, one. This is why, in order to make the ZPD into a diagnostic and not a pedagogical tool, we need to know the pedological age levels whose zones, measured in years, it was designed to diagnose. We also need some way of diagnosing them that does not depend either on the calendar (passport years) or on the hated Binet-Simon tasks which Vygotsky used and criticized and which were later used to criticize him. These were what the ZPD was designed to replace. (It seems to me that these two problems might make good special issues for MCA! I wonder....) David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 5:22 AM Marc Clar? > wrote: Dear Wagner and other colleagues, I'll try to briefly share my interpretation about this issue. In my understanding, the formation of a ZDP implies the intellectual (or meaningful) imitation (p.210) by the child of a meaning that has a level of generality at which the child cannot form meanings. For example, an adult publicly form the "true concept" of "living being", and a child at the stage of "complexes" forms an intellectual imitation of that meaning (which will be a "functional equivalent" of it). So, the child forms a meaning with a level of generality that is beyond her actual level of development. This enables a dialectic tension between this meaning, formed through intellectual imitation, and the meanings that the child can form spontaneously. This dialectic tension between meanings of different levels of generality generates a process of self-development (p.229) leading to the structural emergence of a new level of generality (p.231), at which the child will be now able to form meanings spontaneously. So, when a child intellectually imitates a meaning at a level of generality at which she cannot form meanings spontaneously, this meaning shows the PLD of the child: the next level of generality at which the child will be able to spontaneously form meanings. This meaning enters into a dialectical tension with meanings that the child is already able to form spontaneously (her ALD). This dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD is what pushes development and what turns the PLD of the child into her next ALD. I have further developed this interpretation in the following paper: Clar?, M. (2017). How Instruction Influences Conceptual Development: Vygotsky?s Theory Revisited. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 50-62, DOI:10.1080/00461520.2016.1221765 (I can privately sent the manuscript if needed) Best, Marc Clar? University of Lleida Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit > del dia dv., 29 de mar? 2019 a les 18:34: Hello, What is the difference between Zone of proximal development (ZPD) and Potential Level of Development (PLD)? In thinking and speech (in the collected works v1 in English) Vygotsky defines ZPD and in page 209. It seems to me that he writes about the PLD also in page 211. At page 209 PLD seems to be what children can do with the guidance of an adult. And that ZDP is the exact same thing. At page 211 PLD can be understood as something that can enter the ZPD, so not the same as ZPD, so something that children can learn soon, but can not do even with help now (ZPD) and surely not alone. For me this makes more sense, since in this case the PLD would match the Social Situation of Development (SSD - collected works v5 pg 198), and the ZPD would be what is between the PLD and the Actual Level of Development (ALD). In other words the ZPD is the dialectical movement towards the devir, the PLD/SSD. But at the same time in Mind in society (page 86) the same text is edited in a different way, stating that the PLD is what is written in page 209 from above, but, that the ZPD is what is between ALD and this PLD, i.e., what is between what children can do with help and what they can do alone. What exactly is this "between"? Sorry if the answer seem to be obvious, but I am a bit lost here. All the best, Wagner Luiz Schmit UNESP - Brazil This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190331/ae391226/attachment.html From simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za Sun Mar 31 11:35:17 2019 From: simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za (Simangele Mayisela) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 18:35:17 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD In-Reply-To: <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA8013397A678@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> References: <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA8013397A678@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> Message-ID: <136A8BCDB24BB844A570A40E6ADF5DA8013397A6C0@Elpis.ds.WITS.AC.ZA> Sorry, Marc ? Dr. Simangele Mayisela Senior Lecturer, Ed. Psychologist Department of Psychology, SHCD. Wits University, Johannesburg Tel: 011 717 4529 From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Simangele Mayisela Sent: 31 March 2019 08:33 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD Dear Wagner, marc and David Thank for affording us moment to check what we think we have grasped and got to know. I may be having a primitive understanding of the three concepts, have been consolidated from reading your communique. I think the PLD level of development is socially determined, however it is also determined by the biological, i.e. phenotypical ? which I think it is the one that is determined by years ? since generally human being can develop certain mental skills at particular age ranges, although there are exceptions to the norm ? based on cultural exposure of the child. The ADL is determined as an aftermath ?once the child had acquired he skill. It can be determined earlier or later than the PLD depending on whether the child receives social intervention or not, or in the worst case scenario, it may not even come to fruition if there is no stimulation at all. The ZPD is therefore what happens between the PLD (the goal the teacher is working towards through activity) and the ALD (the acquisition of the skills, which can be measured as whether adequate or not ? novice or expert depending on where one is based) to determine further intervention for remaining ZPD to improve the current ALD towards the PLD. All the best, R, S?ma Dr. Simangele Mayisela Senior Lecturer, Ed. Psychologist Department of Psychology, SHCD. Wits University, Johannesburg Tel: 011 717 4529 From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Marc Clar? Sent: 30 March 2019 10:59 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ZPD Dear Wagner, In my view, the ZPD is the dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD. So the ZPD, in my understanding, is neither the PLD nor the ALD, but the dialectical tension (or distance) between the two, which is what pushes conceptual development through a process of self-development. In my view, the Social Situation of Development is what makes possible this dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD. In order to enable this tension, the child must intellectually imitate a meaning at a level of generality which is beyond her ALD. This is only possible if this meaning is formed by others in the Social Situation of Development of the child (a system of social relationships involving the child). So the Social Situation makes the PLD available to the child; that is, the Social Situation offers a meaning which is formed at a level of generality in which the child cannot form meanings, and then the child intellectually imitates this meaning, and this enables a dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD (a ZPD). All the best, Marc. Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit > del dia ds., 30 de mar? 2019 a les 2:35: Hello, So there is only two "concepts", the actual level of development and the zone or level of potential development, both measured in year because of a better way to measure them, right? Usually I see ZPD (one concept) defined as the distance between actual level of development (another concept) and potential level of development (yet another concept). And now the Kellogg points out the measure in years, I notice that almost never I saw it used this way, usually it is as if ZPD happens in a meeting, a class, a play... But if it measures the development of mental functions, them years make a lot more of sense. And what about the relationship between ZPD and Social Situation of Development? I missed the point too much? Wagner On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 18:53 David Kellogg > wrote: In his introduction to the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English Collected Works), Vygotsky uses "the zone of its (the critical age's) proximal development" to refer to...the subsequent age level, that is, preschool. This is quite consistent with all of the other things we know about the ZPD--it is measured in years (and not months or moments), those years are developmental years and not "passport" (i.e. calendar) years, and it is a diagnostic and not a pedagogical device. Although both are measured in (develomental) years, a "level" is not the same thing as a "zone": the child functioning at the level of two developmental years is not the same thing as the zone of two developmental years which separates that child from the neonate. The level is the age period at which the child can function. The zone is the distance between two levels, e.g. the distance between the child at (developmental age) three and the child at (developmental) preschool age. The level is a milestone, but the zone is the distance between milestones. The real level or real zone is not the same thing as the potential zone or potential level, precisely because the internalization of a function (vraschivaniya) takes years. If we find, for example, that it is literally true that the function the child can realize with assistance today is a function that the child can realize without assistance tomorrow--literally within twenty-four hours of instruction--all we have demonstrated is that this function is part of the actual level of development and not the next, or proximal, one. This is why, in order to make the ZPD into a diagnostic and not a pedagogical tool, we need to know the pedological age levels whose zones, measured in years, it was designed to diagnose. We also need some way of diagnosing them that does not depend either on the calendar (passport years) or on the hated Binet-Simon tasks which Vygotsky used and criticized and which were later used to criticize him. These were what the ZPD was designed to replace. (It seems to me that these two problems might make good special issues for MCA! I wonder....) David Kellogg Sangmyung University New Article; David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER?S TALE: VYGOTSKY?S ?VRASHCHIVANIYA?, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ?INGROWING? IN THE WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 Some e-prints available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200 On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 5:22 AM Marc Clar? > wrote: Dear Wagner and other colleagues, I'll try to briefly share my interpretation about this issue. In my understanding, the formation of a ZDP implies the intellectual (or meaningful) imitation (p.210) by the child of a meaning that has a level of generality at which the child cannot form meanings. For example, an adult publicly form the "true concept" of "living being", and a child at the stage of "complexes" forms an intellectual imitation of that meaning (which will be a "functional equivalent" of it). So, the child forms a meaning with a level of generality that is beyond her actual level of development. This enables a dialectic tension between this meaning, formed through intellectual imitation, and the meanings that the child can form spontaneously. This dialectic tension between meanings of different levels of generality generates a process of self-development (p.229) leading to the structural emergence of a new level of generality (p.231), at which the child will be now able to form meanings spontaneously. So, when a child intellectually imitates a meaning at a level of generality at which she cannot form meanings spontaneously, this meaning shows the PLD of the child: the next level of generality at which the child will be able to spontaneously form meanings. This meaning enters into a dialectical tension with meanings that the child is already able to form spontaneously (her ALD). This dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD is what pushes development and what turns the PLD of the child into her next ALD. I have further developed this interpretation in the following paper: Clar?, M. (2017). How Instruction Influences Conceptual Development: Vygotsky?s Theory Revisited. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 50-62, DOI:10.1080/00461520.2016.1221765 (I can privately sent the manuscript if needed) Best, Marc Clar? University of Lleida Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit > del dia dv., 29 de mar? 2019 a les 18:34: Hello, What is the difference between Zone of proximal development (ZPD) and Potential Level of Development (PLD)? In thinking and speech (in the collected works v1 in English) Vygotsky defines ZPD and in page 209. It seems to me that he writes about the PLD also in page 211. At page 209 PLD seems to be what children can do with the guidance of an adult. And that ZDP is the exact same thing. At page 211 PLD can be understood as something that can enter the ZPD, so not the same as ZPD, so something that children can learn soon, but can not do even with help now (ZPD) and surely not alone. For me this makes more sense, since in this case the PLD would match the Social Situation of Development (SSD - collected works v5 pg 198), and the ZPD would be what is between the PLD and the Actual Level of Development (ALD). In other words the ZPD is the dialectical movement towards the devir, the PLD/SSD. But at the same time in Mind in society (page 86) the same text is edited in a different way, stating that the PLD is what is written in page 209 from above, but, that the ZPD is what is between ALD and this PLD, i.e., what is between what children can do with help and what they can do alone. What exactly is this "between"? Sorry if the answer seem to be obvious, but I am a bit lost here. All the best, Wagner Luiz Schmit UNESP - Brazil This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190331/993bf648/attachment.html From mpacker@cantab.net Sun Mar 31 13:29:24 2019 From: mpacker@cantab.net (Martin Packer) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 15:29:24 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: JustLabs is hiring a Program Officer! References: Message-ID: > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Krizna Gomez > Subject: JustLabs is hiring a Program Officer! > Date: March 31, 2019 at 1:32:53 PM GMT-5 > To: Krizna Gomez > > Dear friends and cool partners, > > Please help us find this new member of our team. A lot of exciting work ahead that we will need important reinforcement for! > > Thank you! > > > Best, > Kriz > > > Krizna Gomez > JustLabs > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190331/86d43e8e/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JustLabs logo.png Type: image/png Size: 13984 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190331/86d43e8e/attachment.png -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190331/86d43e8e/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: job description_Program Officer_JustLabs.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 86983 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190331/86d43e8e/attachment.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190331/86d43e8e/attachment-0002.html From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Mar 31 15:33:21 2019 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 15:33:21 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fwd: JustLabs is hiring a Program Officer! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Wow, that looks like a fabulous job, Martin. mike On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 1:32 PM Martin Packer wrote: > Begin forwarded message: > > *From: *Krizna Gomez > *Subject: **JustLabs is hiring a Program Officer!* > *Date: *March 31, 2019 at 1:32:53 PM GMT-5 > *To: *Krizna Gomez > > Dear friends and cool partners, > > Please help us find this new member of our team. A lot of exciting work > ahead that we will need important reinforcement for! > > Thank you! > > > Best, > Kriz > > *Krizna Gomez * > JustLabs > > > > > -- The past is a foreign country. They do things differently there. L.P. Hartley -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190331/725a920e/attachment.html