[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] Space, neighbourhood, dwelling in, in*formation as notions with a "family resemblance"

Hi Ivan,
 I'm afraid that is a rather multi-faceted endeavour -   it would be 'more than passing interest' ( as Mike in  the to Swinburne 'design' thread orients to) - but here this hasn't yet been attempted in a thorough scholarly way with depth of engagement in the very diverse themes in CHAT traditions, and using an explication consistent with this form of biological perspective. ( An interest that  would refine using inclusional ontology, in reframing with reference to those traditions.)

I can only share my own experience of sticking points where each finds issue with the others' discourse, at most, but it's difficult to 'pitch'.  I mentioned Maturana and I first tried to examine commonalities and areas where each adds to the other in a paper this summer - I can send an extract if you wish. I found that  these ideas were invited for examination amongst members of the systems community - however  a biological perspective to be difficult 'subject matter'  to attract or engage interest amongst  AT researchers ( another long story).  What Rayner's contribution offers to this is an ontology which is dynamic and relational.

This current discussion through Tony's observation of   'shared experience' as  'experience in which
the experience of others participates in the experience of any one, in the
course of the experiencing.' Might have brought out a place for rethinking the somatic and has a lot to do with 'energy' as well as perception mediated through the nervous system. However the biological knowledge of this kind of catalysis in the body is over-shadowed by the neurological as if it was the only 'system' in the body - not contigous with others in dynamics that we have insufficient direct knowledge about .
I liked Elinor Ochs petition at ISCAR as it acknowledged that we don't have a grasp of how to study the watershed of experience spanning this living dynamic.  ( Indexical meaning 'arcs' towards a place where meaning can begin to form' and that in actuality awareness of the living moment is
never complete.
Maturana's 'recursions' in languaging relies upon circular closure to work upon empirical experience against a linear
flow ( such as our notion of time) , a relation which is problematic. Though he does see that the root of social orientation is emotional and love for others.  Recurrence has a spiraling
rather than replicable circular form, each recurrence is revealed by a new
capacity –or hidden inner form which affords new learning (which crafts

I am also reminded of the intense discussion of 'concepts' and Jay Lemke's questions of the extent of  theoretical ground in CHAT  in concept formation, where some researchers have reached out to Schutz (Marianne Hedegaard for example). At Lancaster a distinction was made that whilst Schutz bases his work upon Husserl's distinction between a natural attitude of 'common sense' belief and the phenomenological attitude in which that belief is suspended, Husserl regarded the everyday world only as a preliminary to making the 'phenomenological reduction' [ to 'data of consciousness'],  it is the everyday 'lived in world' that is Schutz's main concern - ie more sociologist that phenomenologist wanting to analyse the 'nature of structures which are taken as given'. It is this attitude that is frustrated by 'incompleteness', as that which is prevailing 'in the moment' as living isn't purely rational, of course, it is embodied- the analytic separation of emotion and isolation towards considering rationality in concept formation is problematic. Imagination, as a phenomenon, goes beyond emotion though - and articulates through hope ( of course when I say this I'm drawing on a concept of hope, not the feeling in any living moment).

Perhaps it's in this that  Bruce's comment about Lefebvre's terms  brings out a place for Alan Rayner's space as presence of 'receptivity' ?
- to go back to the observation:- 
 ' the presence or absence of a social space - not necessarily physical
proximity but a medium through which an acting collectivity can form.'
and a quote from Alan Rayner's paper on  analysis using ideas of completeness which he drew from understanding boundaries in the study of fungii

"The very idea of complete ‘whole units’ existing anywhere, at any scale in Nature as an energetically
open, fluid system does not make sense. The fluidly variable connectivity of natural

inclusionality arises from the coming together
(contiguity/inter-connectivity), fusion (confluence/intra-connectivity) and dissociation
(individuation/differentiation) of energetic paths, corridors or channels of included space in
labyrinthine branching
systems and networks"Where networks are not constituted as connected nodes, but are dynamic in a process of relational networking. Maturana's position was that we are 'social' through orientation  lead by emotion - our 'doing' arises through 'for others' first ( another rich strand in activity theoretical work). 

This messy complex ( that might seem quite ambiguous -  as these discourses are terms and terms apart)  is why I wanted to express an interest - but didn't have a sense of how to make a contribution that would make s difference!

xmca mailing list