Re: [xmca] What does "separation" mean

[Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>]

Hi Mike and Michael
Mike, you suggest the term separation as a concept may be similar to a
conversation between Jaan and Barbara and how to understand "context".  How
do I go about recovering those discussions?

Mike, you also asked if John Shotter is trying to rise above the empirical?
I'm not sure if his notion of consciousness as "con-scientia" [as
witnessable knowing along with others] is considered metaphysical.  His
basic premise, as I read his work, is that there is a form of consciousness
that can only be EXPERIENCED from WITHIN a living activity. Aform of
"knowing" that is affective-volitional.  He references an article by Nagel
asking the question "What is it like to be a bat?" [p.7 of the article  in
"papers for discussion"]  Shotter suggests Nagel is suggesting a quite new
approach to the problem in terms of " an OBJECTIVE phenomenology not
dependent on empathy or the imagination... [whose] goal would be to
DESCRIBE, at least in part, the subjective character of experience in a form
comprehensible to a being incapable of having those experiences" (Nagel,
1982, p. 402)  John adds in interpreting this question,  "In other words ...
bats clearly have experience and a point of view, and we can EXPERIENCE them
as exhibiting there 'point of view' on the world in their actions - we can
experience the EFFORTS of a will at work."  (Shotter, page 7)   John would
point out that we can represent what it might be like to live WITHIN the
living  activity of a bat by observing their behavior [as an external
observer]

John then brings it back to what it is like to be a person.  He suggests we
can see the "volitional contours" of the dynamic unfolding of people's
SPONTANEOUS responsiveness to their surroundings in the sequential unfolding
of their 1st-person LIVING EXPRESSIONS in which they display their INNER
lives to others around them. As John states, "Empathy or imagination on our
part is NOT needed. Indeed, it is only FROM WITHIN the LIVING interplay
occurring between them and us, that they can communicate to us what they
"think" and 'feel' about events in our common surroundings."  We can be
SENSED [Fernando Rey] by others as intentionally, effortfully making
EXPRESSIVE movements through time contours. movements that reach out, in an
anticipatory fashion toward the future.

Now is this form of "seeing" or "jointly KNOWING" from within the INNER
SENSE of the activity "empirical"  It is certainly a gestalten. As I read
John's work it is not the gestalt of gestalt psychology [located in the
subjective mind] but rather Goethe's notion of gestalen that Andy is trying
to explicate. Gestalen as inner knowing where the inner is the social
situation of development.  NOw John's work is explicity focusing on one part
or unity of this larger Gestalten. The intersubjective gestalen
experienced from WITHIN the living dialogical con-scientia of knowing that
is not subjective "knowing about" but rather "knowing with"  To see in THIS
way is a particular form of consciousness that is different from predicative
knowing about.  Not more primary, or sublimated but rather a
separation-difference that is intertwined.  Is con-scientia as one
particular way of seeing and knowing "empirical" [from within living calling
and responsivity] or is it OBJECTIVELY phenomenological as SHARED KNOWING
that is SPONTANEOUS .  I'm not talking about the empirical and external
observations OF the activity that can be explained as components or elements
OF behaviour, but the experience John refers to as con-scientia
[with-knowing or knowing with]

IF one accepts that con-scientia is a particular and "real" form of
"knowing" is it empirical or is it rising above the empirical.  Does it even
exist as a unique form of consciousness?  If one ontologically accepts
con-scientia [as a form of INNER living SHARED knowing, THEN John's approach
to understanding Vygotsky's "word meaning" as BOTH representational AND
affective-volitional makes SENSE [Fernando Rey] Mike as you say this realm
of consciousness is elusive but do we exclude it if we locate it outside the
"empirical" or do we say that there is a "chiasmic intertwining" of
"ideality" and the empirical?

Phenomenolgy as OBJECTIVE says LOOK,  THERE,   in the INNER A CTIVIY of
LIVING EXPRESSION [affective-volitional]  The affective and the generalized
uses of word meaning cannot be separated [analyzed] or dissolved without
extinquishing the gestalten [chiasmic intertwining].   For M-P the gestalen
radically shifts when we turn our heads left or right as grasp a different
perceptual horizon.  In THIS spontaneous manner con-scientia [knowing wih]
IS an INNER gestalten of intersubjective consciousness. Is it rising above
the empirical? Is it real?  What do others think. John Shotter as I
understand him suggests THIS way of knowing [look and see] is the SOURCE of
language as an extension of a particular form of consciousness [a
consciousness, not THE consciousness]  However as A particular form of
consciousness it is displayed in my SHARED "knowing with" my grand daughter
Elena.  The respresentational ways of knowing emerge from this source or
root that IS affective-volitional.

I'm going on about this topic as I sense it is another aspect of "word
meaning" as John's article points out and is therefore intimately implicated
as a "microcosm of consciousness".  How exactly SENSE & MEANING are
intertwined will require the same level of inquiry as Vygotsky gave to
exploring "thought and language" [past] & "thinking and speech". M-P makes
the distinction between the "spoken" word and the "speaking" word.  John
would add we cannot understand the INNER world of the "speaking" word
without con-scientia.

Larry
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 7:40 AM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:

> The term, separation, as people are using it here, seems to be similar if
> not the same as a discussion involving Jaan Valsiner and Barbara Rogoff
> with
> respect to person/environment and in various discussions of how to
> understand "context."
>
> I think recovering those prior discussions might help here.
> mike
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Michael Glassman <MGlassman@ehe.osu.edu
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi Larry,
> >
> > Do you think Shotter is right, I mean that separation is usually
> associated
> > with space.  The earliest ideas of separation in the social sciences I
> can
> > think of seems to come from Freud, who wasn't concerned about physical
> > separation at all, and doesn't seem to conceputalize it that way.  Maybe
> > space comes later with the dominance of measurement?
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu on behalf of Larry Purss
> > Sent: Wed 7/20/2011 10:14 AM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > Subject: [xmca] What does "separation" mean
> >
> >
> >
> > I wanted to ask others to reflect on the meaning of "separation" as it
> > seems
> > central to notions of opposition and chiasmic intertwining. John Shotter
> > states
> >
> > "the very word "separation" as such is misleading: it suggests separation
> > in
> > a spatial sense - we need to realize that the qualitative differences OF
> > SUCCESSIVE MOMENTS cannot be captured in spatial imagery:  to differ
> > qualitatively and to be distinct in space are two quite different
> notions.
> >
> > Separation and differentiation as word meanings are common sense terms
> used
> > to describe developmental processes but I wonder if we are  sharing
> common
> > responses to these word meaninings?
> >
> > Larry
> > __________________________________________
> > _____
> > 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
>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca