[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 Christine, Mike, Ivan,  Tony and others exploring the dialectical
interweaving [spiralling] of the concepts of "moving fluidity", "e-motion",
"artifacticity", "sedimentation" "concepts as historically developed ways of
life" "in*formation" etc.

Mike, I would suggest that bringing back emotion [possibly through the
concept of moving fluidity] is one line of concepts which must be
interweaved [as con-text] into the dialogue.
I'm wondering if you have an archived article by Zinchenko that could begin
this line of inquiry.

How "fluidity of movement as ecology of life" and "artifacts" as sedimented
structures or forms  [ "open" boundaries contrasted with "contained"
boundaries] seems to be an evolving topic.

"Matter" [in both senses of matter "as form" and as "mattering
connections"]  is a recurring theme I'm grappling with in trying to grasp
these key concepts.

In particular the noton of "subjectification" as NECESSARY for the
development of a "sense" of subjectivity or center of consciousness. Then we
get into what is "center" in space?  Ivan your bringing in Jay Lemke's
exploration of "parts and wholes" was very helpful.  Andy's notion of
"concepts" as "materiality" [in the sense of interconnections not essences
that are HISTORICALLY developed as social formations] is also intriguing.

Mike, if Zinchenko, Anna Stetsenko, Rey, and others in the CHAT tradition
are re-engaging with notions of "subjectivity" this may be an approach that
can also bridge back to action research as Christine discusses in the other
current post.  It seems ISCAR [the book on Vygotsky in the 21st century and
the seminar] is also grappling with this issue within the tradition of CHT
[and CHAT?]

What do others think
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:03 PM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:

> That is a whole lot to take in, Christine, over even to hold still for
> contemplation!
> One underlying intuition that seemed to be consistent across your example
> thinkers and ideas we that of fluidity, of living movement. This put me
> very
> much in mind of
> Vladimir P. Zinchenko. VPZ sites various russian scholars including
> Nicholas
> Bernshtein, who come up with ideas such as "living movement." Bernshtein is
> said to have likened living movement to a spiders web waving in the breeze.
> there is an issue of journal of russian and east european psych coming out
> with several of VPZ's ideas. I'll keep an eye out for it.
> mike
> PS- re fluidity, you get this kind of statement from Ingold:
> an organism can be thought of as "a flow of material substance in a space
> that is topologically fluid. I conclude that the organism (animal or human)
> should be understood not as a bounded entity surrounded by an environment
> but as an unbounded entanglement of lines in fluid space. (p. 64)
> Is this a move back from digital models of organic life to analogue? Is it
> needed to
> give us a way to include emotions in our accounts of cognitive processes?
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:27 AM, christine schweighart <
> schweighartgate@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > 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
> > meanings).
> >
> > 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!
> > Christine.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  __________________________________________
> > _____
> > 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