Andy, Charles
As I listened in to your conversation reflecting on "ideal typical
paths of development" the question of the place of *genres* was in the
backgound of my reading.
QUESTION: Andy, do you perceive "ideal typical paths of development
as a genre" or having the potential to become a genre?
Also do you perceive genres and "traditions" as having a family
resemblance and having the potential to become part of the
conversation exploring "ideal typical paths of development"?
Andy, as your concrete example [of the practice of law], or Charles
concrete example [of filling out tax forms as a practice] indicate,
concepts develop within activity settings within historical events
THROUGH TIME within *life worlds*.
Your referencing Brandom [a student of Rorty] is fascinating.
Your comment was:
What I am interested in is an approach at the fundamental level which
can do justice to the subtlety and complexity of your discourse. Let
me cite from the American Pragmatic philosopher, a student of Richard
Rorty at Pittburg, Robert Brandom:
"Traditional term logics built up from below, offering first
accounts of the meanings of the concepts associated with singular
and general terms (in a nominalistic way: in terms of what they name
or stand for), then of judgments constructed by relating those
terms, and finally of properties of /inferences /relating to those
judgments. This order of explanation is still typical of
contemporary representational approaches to semantics ... Pragmatist
semantic theories typically adopt a top-down approach because they
start from the /use /of concepts, and what one does with concepts is
apply them in judgment and action." [/Articulating Reasons/,
Brandom 200, p. 13]
Andy this *Traditional* [classical?] genre known as a nominalistic
"way" as the *starting* point seems to point to an approach that
Taylor refers to as *strict* [sedimented] dialectics. The terms are
known PRIOR to constructing the framework or theory that is built
up using known products.
Andy, your inviting us to consider a new starting point within praxis
or *shared projects* [as anticipated projections] you are wanting to
start with *ideal typical formations*
It is interesting you mention Rorty. I want to attach a paper which
may be tangential to this thread, but he is exploring pragmatism as
grounding PARTICULAR genres in practice WITHIN effective history.
Andy, it may have some relevance for exploring *ideal typical forms of
development* For me this a fuzzy concept but hope with your
willingness to *hear me into speech* that I will develop further.
Larry
Larry
However, how do you understand the relationship between these concepts?
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
<mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
Thanks Charles. The example I gave was intended to challenge the
idea that concepts can be understood in terms of a typology or
system of classification. Rather I think the approach should
utilise "ideal typical paths of development." And this is what I
see Vygotsky doing.
That said, your further explanation of how you understand
"scientific" as what I would call an ideal typical case of "not
only the secular institutions and disciplines of the academy and
professions, but also those of the spiritual domain, the
performing and graphic arts, commerce games and sports, politics,
criminal culture, and other domains that have a robust alignment
of practice..." I think that small qualification goes a long way
to giving people cause to think when they read Vygotsky.
Andy
Charles Bazerman wrote:
I look forward to your elaborations and will view your video.
Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
Date: Monday, November 12, 2012 6:27 pm
Subject: Re: Fwd: [xmca] A Failure of Communication
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
<mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
I'm sorry for being so obscure, Chuck. I am still working
on how to explain my position. But all I am proposing is
my reading of Vygotsky on Concepts as set out in "Thinking
and Speech." Nothing more. I certainly do not think
concepts are "philosophic phantasms," although this is the
most common response to discovery of the kind of points I
am raising:
"Well, if concepts are not like this, then they must be
philosophic phantasms and not worth chasing after."
I am fine with locating yourself in this world in a
pragmatist way, etc., etc. I do nothing different. Though
I am not sure what you mean by "communal" and other
allusions to "community." Maybe my video
https://vimeo.com/groups/129320/videos/35819238
explains it better. Yes, I think there is a "more grounded
approach,"
though those are not words of mine. I am certainly not
trying to "deal with concepts in an abstract way," in fact
that is a fair definition of what I am opposing.
Andy
Charles Bazerman wrote:
Andy, I am not sure I see what you are driving at, and
thus I do not know how to continue the discussion. I
know you have written and just published a book on
concepts, but I have not read it. Are you
suggesting that there is a more grounded approach to
concepts or that concepts dissolve and that we should
not chase after them as philosophic phantasms?
I am trying to deal with concepts not in an abstract
philosophic way
but in a pragmatist way based on the social circulation of
terms and their use in communal practices and then on what
evidence we can glean about internal phenomena--and as I
say in the essay, my primary activity system and project
as a teacher of writing has to do with helping people
engage with public circulation of words which people find
of value in their endeavors and in their personal
understanding of the world which they act within. To that
task I bring the resources of Vygotsky and activity
theory. I do not claim an epistemic position outside
those realms of practice. So what are you trying to
persuade me and others of, or what difficulty in my
pursuit of my practices within my activity systems do you
want me to attend to?
Once I have better bearings of the intersection of our
interests, I may be able to say something more useful.
Chuck
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca