[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[xmca] Re: microcosm/unit of analysis and xmca discourse
- To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: [xmca] Re: microcosm/unit of analysis and xmca discourse
- From: Mike Cole <email@example.com>
- Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 08:50:51 -0800
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:reply-to:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=qE0V9tJv1dxoz5MRhJWgIqyQinIRP4x1rk1VuA4xjYw=; b=A1d54klO9BplKdSXfjTQHfwU+rJyVIB3NRUtlVcgGEgf032gAWuVPymNTL+xtYS6u+ etP+P5oKK8R4RD+wKavCAGFipXk24BEDxn5VTggerlrGfiOGmbH5Phr+rO9kAq5oqoG4 QYT9fYfiU1PxzHQk+D//MkiHtoM2cjp+PNBXM=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=WdZgI3o69Y9/OYA9v1pQ/EyZA8ecaM/ANuQedK7ZDxB0kYQiGiDxa21ISphiKttZEX hIZAoVMjhcREVcicUVCHrMSu5PJuCgVYN+t4rbkBBsCIkT5y1rR/OSqmQ3njEVT6Y7xN Cmr+nExxFwoqnv1DRaIVDm4eLZhOeNK1vL4Qs=
- List-archive: <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca>
- List-help: <mailto:email@example.com?subject=help>
- List-id: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca.weber.ucsd.edu>
- List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-subscribe: <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- Reply-to: email@example.com, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: email@example.com
Hi Niolai-- Yes, XMCA discourse can be confusing. Each specific topic opens
up others and the continuations interleave, disappear, reappear. Very
Bakhtinian (except for that early turgid guy that David ran across).
I was specifically focused on your comment that there is a long
philosophical tradition to which we should be privy to understand the
important differences between concept of "unit of analysis" and "microcosm."
Andy, who is trained philosophically, seemed to understand perfectly well
and to agree with you.
All talk of "unit of analysis" without reference to "unit of analysis of
what" makes me nervous. And the term, "consciousness" makes me nervous in
I am not always certain what people think they are talking about, although
recent discussions on XMCA seem helpful in that regard.
But somewhere, I believe, LSV refers to perezhivanie as a unti of
development. That has me a little perplexed because perezhivanie appears to
different things to LSV at different times and to different contemporary
thinkers in different writings.
Dima Leontiev, somewhere, raises this issue with respect to H20 when
speaking of how the synthesis of hydrogen and oxygen under particular
conditions helps one to understand oceans.
I think a similar thing is happening with your question about word meaning
and unit of analysis for consciousness. As I understand, you are seeking to
clarify the relation between two concepts, neither of which has a
meaning or well developed empirical examples that serve as a common
background for discussion.
But that idea, too, is certainly contestable, if anyone cares to do so....
and thereby enlighten us all.
PS-- Note that I am changing the subject line. As the note at the end of all
digest notes indicates, its good to do so before responding because it helps
people track the conversation.
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 3:37 AM, Nikolai Veresov
> Mike wrote:
>> Nikolai-- I did not understand the message below. Might you expand, even
>> it requires explaining some deep philosophical issues to us? We are
>> mutual understanding here, not winning arguments or splitting hairs.
>> Just change the subject line so that we do not get pages of repetition
>> we can get from the xmca archive. For example -- Microcosm vs unit of
> Dear Mike. Thank you for the reply.
> 1/ I did not want to bring any kind of mess of disorder to the high
> respected MCA community. I just wanted to get an answer to my question
> "Where Vygotsky speaks on the word meaning as the unit of analysis of human
> consciousness?" Who else if not Vygotskians can do it? I am working on the
> paper about this at the moment and I just wanted to know the opinions in the
> community. The answer I have got is not about unit but about the word
> meaning as microcosm.
> 2/ It was not my intention to discuss my paper on Marxism or the professors
> dresses in South Korea. I do not know how to react on criticisms of David
> and Ulvi even though the reaction is needed in such kind of discourse.
> 3/ I did not have in mind any "winning arguments" or "splitting hairs". If
> my questions bring such an impression I prefer to return to my status of the
> reader of this mailing list discussions, not the active participant.
> I apologise for inconveniences.
> xmca mailing list
xmca mailing list