Re: [xmca] Inside|Outside; emotion|cognition

From: Carol Macdonald <carolmacdon who-is-at>
Date: Thu Apr 03 2008 - 11:10:47 PDT

Mike, on your physics experiment, it seems to me that you are opening
different streams for capturing information, but not sure what kind of
information you are going to get: it is certainly a very open design. Are
you asking children to do think aloud protocols? Are you promoting them to
do "emote" aloud protocols? Is the whole process going to be videoed--I
would certainly want to be able to reanalyse historical moments of the data.
I am going to talk to a colleague of mine who did a piece of research on LSV
and interactive ICT and get back to you with some of his thoughts. Off the
cuff, I think the emotion-cognition relationship is really only solvable on
the theoretical level. It has a natural path yes, but empirically, the
children have to be able to reflectively abstract on their emotions, and we
really never ask them to do that except cognitively. In our
analysis/experimental setup we may be creating something which is atypical,
but of course, then leading change, at least in your context.

On 03/04/2008, Mike Cole <> wrote:
> I'll follow up on the civil war issue separately, David. But want to
> pursue
> the issue of intonation. Reason: I think we need some
> observable/classifiable/ maybe even quantifiable ways to study the
> emotion/action/cognition relationshipS.
> Given your comments on variability, what are the consequences for method?
> Concrete case. We are experimenting with a new way to teach kids basic
> physics concepts that involves them using stop action animation, resulting
> in a video representation of the concept. And, along the way, a video and
> audio representation of the processes of interaction that assemble the
> product. There are now large memory digital audio recorders with big
> memories and handy usb ports so we can read the output straight into
> existing software analysis programs. How do we start to think about the
> kinds of data streams that need to be coordinated in order to make
> warrantable claims about emotion|cognition??
> One of many questions on my mind
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 8:46 PM, David Kellogg <>
> wrote:
> > Welcome back, Mike!
> >
> > I think part of the confusion comes from a difference in PURPOSE. You
> want
> > to see the Russian Civil War as an analogy for the developmental crisis.
> (I
> > can actually think of better analogies: Caravaggio, Rembrandt, the Black
> > Panther Party, etc.) I want to see the Russian Civil War as the concrete
> > context in which LSV experienced Marxism, as a living and deadly reality
> > with direct implications for the immediate future rather than simply a
> guide
> > to history.
> >
> > The physical presence of foreign troops on Soviet soil was certainly
> real
> > enough. Interestingly, it was the WESTERN allies who saw the allied
> > expeditionary forces as outside interventions. Churchill said that
> > Bolshevism had to be strangled in its cradle. Baron Wrangel organized
> his
> > legionnaires according to the country they came from and the language
> they
> > spoke. In Seattle there was a general strike which successfully blocked
> > Woodrow Wilson's dispatch of arms for Vladivostok.
> >
> > If tomorrow morning fourteen countries landed
> > Arabic-speaking expeditionary forces in and around California in support
> of
> > embattled Muslims, I doubt very much if the LA Times would talk about
> > outside help arriving for a locally led movement. Yet that is how the
> > Russian government, under the influence of Marxism, chose to see the
> matter
> > and portray it in the papers, papers which LSV must have read. (I still
> have
> > this idiotic idea that if I read everything that LSV ever read I will be
> > able to think everything that he thought.)
> >
> > I don't think I ever said that Wolff-Michael overgeneralized his results
> > from Praat. But it seems to me that the reality of language is VARIATION
> and
> > not SYSTEMATIZATION, even as a system of words and rules it is over-free
> > rather than overdetermined. This is nowhere so true as in intonation.
> >
> > Even fairly coarse generalizations such as "yes-no questions tend to
> come
> > up" and "wh-questions tend to come down unless they are requests for
> > confirmation" fall apart very easily (think of Irish intonation). I
> don't
> > think it's the case that we can simply "read off" an emotion from an
> > intonation; intonation has a quite mutable relationship to both temporal
> and
> > spatial context. Intonation is not like grammar or vocabulary; it's more
> > like proxemics and eye-contact. Intonation was what Wittgenstein must
> have
> > had in mind when he said that to mean something was to go up to somebody
> and
> > tap them on the shoulder (Philosophy of Grammar).
> >
> > David Kellogg
> > Seoul National University of Education
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster
> > Total Access<
> >,
> > No Cost.
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list

Visiting Researcher,
Wits School of Education
6 Andover Road
Johannesburg 2092
011 673 9265  082 562 1050
xmca mailing list
Received on Thu Apr 3 11:13 PDT 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu May 01 2008 - 17:14:13 PDT