Re: [xmca] Molar, Molecular and Additive behaviour

Fascinating response, Robert. So let's see if I understand
you right. A mass of interconnected actions can be
understood as some *whole* (and not just an arbitrary
collection of individual things) if we can perceive some
kind of *constraint*, operating over the domain, which
limits the domain of possible configurations? Is that it?

Andy

Robert Bracewell wrote:
> Hi Andy and all,
>
> I agree with Michael that the relationship between activity and action is a
> constitutive one, but I think this points to a big theoretical gap in CHAT
> generally. If actions are the constituents of activity, then the issue
> arises as to how the constituents are arranged in order to constitute
> activity (and there may be other types of constituents in activity also). As
> Leont¹ev said, this arrangement cannot be serial (e.g., chains of s-r
> pairs), nor additive in the sense of accumulative (as contrasted with the
> mathematical sense). So how are we to theorize the arrangement? The issue of
> arranging constituents to achieve higher order structures has been treated
> by both linguistics and artificial intelligence. The general approach is to
> constrain the possible relationships between constituents--in linguistics
> this usually done via a grammar, in AI via a program. For CHAT I think our
> task may be to build on Leont¹ev and figure out these constraints.
>
> Regards,
>
> --Bob Bracewell
>
>
>
> On 8/29/08 1:24 PM, "Wolff-Michael Roth" <mroth@uvic.ca> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andy,
>> I think he expresses the constitutive relation between actions and
>> activity. Activity is not just the sum of actions, it presupposes
>> them but is itself presupposed by the actions that constitute it. I
>> am pasting the definition from OED, which appears to be consistent
>> with this (my) reading of Leont'ev. Leont'ev and Vygotsky want to do
>> unit analysis, not element/al analysis. That is, even if you can
>> identify structures within activity, these cannot stand on their own
>> like elements. What they are is dependent on all the other structures
>> that can be identified, with which they stand in a constitutive unit,
>> and which are subordinate to activity. :-)
>>
>> molar, adj.3
>>
>> 2. Psychol. Designating a large-scale unit of behaviour, esp. an
>> integrated set of responses serving to bring about a common goal, as
>> distinguished from an elementary unit of behaviour such as a
>> physiological response (cf. MOLECULAR adj. 5); of or relating to (the
>> study of) such behaviour.
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Michael
>>
>>
>>
>> On 29-Aug-08, at 7:11 AM, Michael Glassman wrote:
>>
>> Andy,
>>
>> This is just my perspective, but I still believe Activity Theory goes
>> back to roots in work done by Stanislavsky - in particular "On Being
>> an Actor" and his book on character development. I think the
>> argument that Stanislavsky makes is that you should never consider
>> each scene individually, as encapsulated and whole, I guess you could
>> say there should be no reification of a scene. You have to consider
>> a scene, and the actions of a character, not only in terms of the
>> entire play, but in terms of what has come before and what comes
>> after - that activity is part of an ongoing process. Stanislavsky
>> was working off the new form of playwrights such as Ibsen, Strindberg
>> and especially Chekhov of course. To give an example, when Nora
>> walks out on Torvald and her father at the end of "A Doll's House"
>> the scene makes little sense in an of itself, and if you think of the
>> scenes of the play as simply being additive you are shocked. But if
>> you consider it as part of a moral activity, with a building
>> motivation that leads to a choice of action it is extraordinarily
>> complelling.
>>
>> Anyway, that's my two cents.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden
>> Sent: Fri 8/29/2008 9:53 AM
>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> Subject: [xmca] Molar, Molecular and Additive behaviour
>>
>>
>>
>> Can anyone help me out here. Leontyev says:
>>
>> "But human practice is not just a series or a sum of
>> actions. In other words, 'activity is a molar, not an
>> additive unit'."
>>
>> OED says:
>>
>> Molar, Psychol. Designating a large-scale unit of behaviour,
>> esp. an integrated set of responses serving to bring about a
>> common goal, as distinguished from an elementary unit of
>> behaviour such as a physiological response (cf. MOLECULAR
>> adj. 5); of or relating to (the study of) such behaviour.
>>
>> 1932 E. C. TOLMAN Purposive Behavior "On the one hand,
>> Watson has defined behavior in terms of its strict physical
>> and physiological details, i.e., in terms of
>> receptor-process, conductor-process, and effector-process
>> per se. We shall designate this as the molecular definition
>> of behavior. And on the other hand, he has come to recognize
>> that behavior is more than and different from the sum of its
>> physiological parts. Behavior has descriptive and defining
>> properties of its own. And we shall designate this latter as
>> the molar definition of behavior."
>>
>> Am I missing something. By "not additive" does Leontyev
>> simply mean that there's more to it than S -> R ?
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>> David Preiss wrote:
>>> based on the work made by max plank and run by san francisco's
>>> exploratorium
>>> http://www.exploratorium.edu/evidence/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> David Preiss, Ph.D.
>>> Subdirector de Extensión y Comunicaciones
>>> Escuela de Psicología
>>> Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile
>>> Av Vicuña Mackenna - 4860
>>> 7820436 Macul
>>> Santiago, Chile
>>>
>>> Fono: 3544605
>>> Fax: 3544844
>>> e-mail: davidpreiss@uc.cl
>>> web personal: http://web.mac.com/ddpreiss/
>>> web institucional: http://www.epuc.cl/profesores/dpreiss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy/ +61 3 9380 9435
>> Skype andy.blunden
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>>
>> <winmail.dat>_______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy/ +61 3 9380 9435 
Skype andy.blunden
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca