[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Peter Smagorinsky on concepts
On 19 January 2012 13:32, Huw Lloyd <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 19 January 2012 12:32, Christine Schweighart <email@example.com>wrote:
>> Hello Huw, Andy
>> I'd use 'generate' rather than 'works' - and I wouldn't use 'mirror'. The
>> two domains ( of the thought experiment and that of actuality in praxis
>> ,living) are relate not through 'complete description of particulars of
>> actuality' (we cannot fully capture all detail of living) corroborating
>> some image 'mirrored' -; but the relation is through 'operational
>> coherences' ( to use Maturana's expression) of praxis of living , or
>> 'criterion of acceptability' that we use in listening to accounts in our
>> 'languaging' in conversations about experience.
I'm fine with this elaboration.
> Just to say that this does
>> not reduce to the domain of our physiological living, actuality is
>> experienced 'in between'.
On this I disagree.
>> Second on systems: I find helpful that 'system' as notion is in our
>> 'thought experiment domain' , not existing 'in the world' , so I'm
>> trying to interpret
>> "All systems comprise of material relations".
Because the "thought experiment domain" takes place within such a system.
xmca mailing list