# Re: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal

```Recursivity, double stimulation, mathematics and fractals.
(a sub-heading to keep the subject-line the same).

Looking over the pieces by Dodd, Engestrom, and Schmittau as well as Mike's
call for a focus on mathematics instruction made me think of fractals and
suggested to me the following questions that take me back to the quest to
understand "double stimulation":

1. Are fractals an example of double stimulation?

2. Do ferns engage in double stimulation?

Fractals are created by the recursive application of a given equation
(usually fairly complex) to multiple levels:
http://hd-fractals.com/examples-of-fractals-in-nature/

So, to Dodd and Goethe, and following Goethe's interest in "...establishing
important new relations and discovering the way in which Nature, with
incomparable
power, develops the greatest complexity from the simple", I wonder if the
fractal might help us to understand how "the greatest complexity develops
from the simple"?

As seen in the above page, fractals are able to approximate what nature
does much better than traditional math does (e.g., whereas fractal patterns
can be found in nature, where does one find a "right angle" in nature?). So
at the lowest level of abstraction, I wonder (loosely following Schmittau
and Davydov and Engestrom): Might fractals be a good way to demonstrate
mathematical relevance to the experienced world of the child?
(notwithstanding the challenge of explaining the complex singular equations
which define the patterns).

And so, on a slightly more abstract level, is the basic idea of the fractal
as a process of applying a single property to multiple levels of analysis
an example, possibly par excellence, of double stimulation?

And on a still slightly more abstract level and to put this in more social
science-y terms, Andrew Abbott has taken this notion of fractal recursion
and demonstrated how it is useful for understanding the ordering and
arrangement of the disciplines of the social sciences. In Chaos of the
Disciplines, Abbott shows how a simple question (e.g., structure vs.
agency) can capture the successive divisions of academia, from the highest
(the "disciplines" proper) to the lowest (sub-sub-fields). This happens
because this heuristic provides the means for discrimination whereby at any
given level, one group defines themselves in opposition to some other group
WITH REGARD TO how each responds to these fundamental questions.

As to the second question of ferns and double stimulation, perhaps the
reason why we wouldn't call what the fern does "double stimulation" is
because the different scales on which the heuristic is being applied are
not exactly different "contexts". I assume that double stimulation should
involve the taking of some heuristic (is it okay to refer to it in this
way?) and applying it to a different context (e.g., the idea of a "unit" of
weight or of length, and that idea of "unit" as the basis for number).

It seems to me that double stimulation is capturing perhaps the most
essential feature of learning/teaching. Is that about right? I'm just
trying to, as Mike says, "get straight" on what this basic idea means and
to mark out some of the boundaries of this concept.

Thanks for the help with this.

And I'll keep watching the meaning of "germ cells" as it develops. I'm not

-greg

On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 9:29 AM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:

> I thought we published an article by Jean Schmittau in MCA, Peter. But
> can't find it at the moment.
>
> Mathematics is a great domain within which to get at the idea of germ cell,
> rising to the concrete, etc., and helps to distinguish a "germ cell" from a
> "sample." I will keep hunting for a super clear example, but this paper
> might help. I also recommend that
> paper by Yrjo on phases of the moon in this regard.
>
> http://www.russianschool.com/sites/default/files/pdf/zdm051a3.pdf
>
> I think we could make a lot of progress as a discourse community, if we
> could get
> straight on what some of these basic ideas mean, or at least the rough
> field of
> reference, so that we can better evaluate seemingly competing ideas.
>
> There is an application of these ideas to a language curriculum by Markova
> and (I think) Davydov, that I edited and published a long time ago. I will
> see if I can nail
> that because it applies to language instruction, not math, and hence might
> be
> more relevant to the many at XMCA who focus on literacy.
>
> mike
>
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu> wrote:
>
> > I'm not familiar with Schmittau, so don't think I've reviewed any books
> by
> > this author.
> >
> > Peter Smagorinsky
> > Distinguished Research Professor of English Education
> > Department of Language and Literacy Education
> > The University of Georgia
> > Athens, GA 30602
> >
> >
> > Advisor, Journal of Language and Literacy Education
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> On
> > Behalf Of Andy Blunden
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 7:39 PM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > Subject: Re: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal
> >
> > That is a very interesting article, Martin! I once collected everything I
> > could find in our contemporary literature on Urphaenomen, but this one is
> > very good indeed! At the time Goethe developed the idea (i.e. 1787) and
> for
> > the next 10 years, he saw his approach as directly in opposition to Kant.
> > But since he reconciled with Schiller, and the two had a close friendship
> > for the last decade of Schiller's life, many people say that Schiller
> > pulled Goethe back to more of an appreciation of Kant. Which would be
> > consistent with the Frankfurter's reading. Interesting!
> > Personally, I don't see that. His last works, such as Part 2 of Faust,
> are
> > still on the same anti-Kantian crusade.
> >
> > On Brett's message. I think you make some fair points. Bourgeois society
> > (i.e. the market) is never all-embracing. The family always continues as
> a
> > site of reproduction of privilege and disadvantage. And Adorno is a very
> > unorthodox thinker! :)
> >
> > On Mike's search: Look forward to your success in finding this paper by
> > Schmittau. Peter Smagorinsky reviewe a book by Schmittau, maybe he
> kjnows?
> > "Kernel concept" contines the biological metaphors for "unit of
> analysis" -
> > germ, cell, seed, generative proposition, etc. I don't doubt that
> Davydov's
> > method of teaching maths proves to be effective as a way of teaching
> > mathematics. You have reported this and I believe it. My disagreements
> with
> > Davydov was mainly in his attitude to spontaneous knowledge, which he
> > regarded as a *barrier*. I don't agree. I think of the 1st year civil
> > engineering student who thinks he knows more than a builder, the 1st year
> > chemistry student who tells their mother how to cook, or the 1st year
> Psych
> > student who is analysing all their friends and family. That's all. He
> > criticised Vygotsky on this point and I think Vygotsky is right about
> that
> > and about the age at which kids can learn true concepts.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >
> >
> > Martin John Packer wrote:
> > > Then this might have some relevance...
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jun 19, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Rauno Huttunen <rakahu@utu.fi> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> I totally agree and that is why I prefer Horkheimer's social theory
> > over Adorno's social theory althought their overlapp.
> > >>
> > >> Rauno
> > >> ________________________________________
> > >> Lähettäjä: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> > >> k&#228;ytt&#228;j&#228;n Andy Blunden [ablunden@mira.net] puolesta
> > >> Lähetetty: 19. kesäkuuta 2013 18:25
> > >> Vastaanottaja: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > >> Aihe: Re: VS: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal
> > >>
> > >> Interesting, Rauno.
> > >> I would have thought that the family as the germ cell of "society"
> > >> either implies a "sociey" which has long, long ago passed into the
> > >> dim past, or Adorno is using "society" in that peculiar meaning, as
> > >> in "everyone who is anyone", "society" as that more or less exclusive
> > >> group of the ultra wealthy elite. Otherwise, "society" is a bad
> > >> concept. The "nation state," bourgeois society, even "community" have
> > some meaning.
> > >> But "society" when it is spoken of nowadays, is usually a fiction, I
> > >> think. Maybe the family is too???
> > >>
> > >> Andy
> > >>
> > >> Rauno Huttunen wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hello,
> > >>>
> > >>> Theodor Adorno in his Minima Moralia speaks about germ cell of
> society
> > meaning family:
> > >>>
> > >>> "Unpolitical attempts to break out of the bourgeois family usually
> > only lead to deeper entanglement in such, and sometimes it seems as if
> the
> > disastrous germ-cell of society, the family, is simultaneously the
> > nourishing germ-cell of the uncompromising will for a different one. "
> > >>>
> > >>> Rauno Huttunen
> > >>> ________________________________________
> > >>> Lähettäjä: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> > >>> k&#228;ytt&#228;j&#228;n Peter Smagorinsky [smago@uga.edu] puolesta
> > >>> Lähetetty: 19. kesäkuuta 2013 13:38
> > >>> Vastaanottaja: eXtended Mind, Culture,  Activity
> > >>> Aihe: RE: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal
> > >>>
> > >>> Sounds good. Thx,p
> > >>>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>> [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 6:35 AM
> > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > >>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal
> > >>>
> > >>> "Germ" was a term used for it by both Hegel and Goethe, but they did
> > not know about "cells". But when Marx introduced the term "cell form" for
> > the same idea (teh cell as the basic unit of biology had been discovered
> > before 1987 when Marx wrote that), the term "germ cell" became current
> > among Marxists. In Hegel it is the abstract concept of a complex process,
> > and called Urphaenomen by Goethe,. Although to make sense of that, you
> have
> > to know that a "concept" is as real and tangible as any artefact or ideal
> > (which is also material) and as Davydov helpfully emphasised, (in
> > principle) an observable material thing, not just an idea or schema. It
> is
> > not some hidden hypothetical something like a force or property of some
> > kind or law or principle (though it doe actually incarnate a principle).
> > But it is the logically primary instance of the complex process, for
> which
> > it acts as an archetype. This is not quite the same as an "exemplar" (or
> > sample) which may be typical, but not necessarily of all the complex
> > process. A "germ cell" or "unit of analysis" is not only immediately and
> > vicerally understandable, but embodies the principle which unifies the
> > entire complex process, and constitutes its unity. A sample is a concrete
> > thing, but its various attributes have not been abstracted from it. The
> > "germ cell" does not have contingent or accidental attributes; all its
> > attributes are essential.
> > >>>
> > >>> Does that (off the top of my head) Spiel help, Peter?
> > >>>
> > >>> Andy
> > >>>
> > >>> Peter Smagorinsky wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> So, how is a germ cell different from a sample?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>> [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> > >>>> On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
> > >>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 8:32 PM
> > >>>> To: ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
> > >>>> Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Eric, attached is a contraband copy of Engestrom &Co.'s article for
> > the Special Issue on Concept Formation - "Embodied Germ Cell at Work:
> > >>>> Building an Expansive Concept of Physical Mobility in Home Care." I
> > have documented my theoretical differences with this article, but I have
> > also endeavoured to put it into practice in my own one-patient
> > rehabilitation facility here at home. This led me to further differences,
> > but even I, who generally has scant regard for privacy, think it is all
> too
> > private to share.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This one you have to pay for, but here is the abstract:
> > >>>> http://tap.sagepub.com/content/21/5/598.abstract
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This is also the type of Engestrom approach which I appreciate. I
> > don't again completely concur with the conclusions here, but I thnk it
> is a
> > first class article!
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Andy
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Helena;
> > >>>>> Have not read him extensively enough but I do like his clinical
> > >>>>> approach to activity theory. Something that is tangible and can be
> > >>>>> conceptualized. Plan on reading him more. I found it interesting
> > >>>>> that he mentions "germ cell" only in passing and doesn't really
> > >>>>> expand much on it. I prefer his expanded triangle model of
> > >>>>> conceptualization and am not understandin why Andy is focused on
> the
> > "germ cell"
> > >>>>> eric
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -----Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com> wrote: -----
> > >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>,
> > >>>>> <ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>, <ablunden@mira.net>
> > >>>>> From: Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com>
> > >>>>> Date: 06/18/2013 11:02AM
> > >>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Eric et al:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I like to read whatever Engestrom material shows up on xmca; he's
> > >>>>> a brilliant and stimulating thinker, but sometimes I have to laugh.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The link Eric posted iactually goes to a proposal, as in "grant
> > >>>>> proposal," although I'm not sure who was going to fund it.
> > >>>>> Engestrom is proposing an ongoing research project that would take
> > >>>>> place at three sites, a healthcare provider, a bank, and a
> > >>>>> telecommunications outfit. He wants to study how his group, the
> > >>>>> Change Laboratory, works with these entities.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> My problem with his creative approach to research is that he acts
> > >>>>> as if the whole world has moved on to whatever he's studying next.
> > >>>>> He talks about "the historical development of work,"
> > >>>>> "work..transformed from mass production and mass customization to
> > >>>>> co-configuration of customer-intelligent products and services
> > >>>>> with long life cycles", "post-bureaucratic work", 'work as "a
> > >>>>> living, growing network.never finished," etc etc. This may be true
> > >>>>> of "work" as it occurs in the Change Laboratory, but for the vast
> > >>>>> majority of human beings, work has not moved on, is not
> > >>>>> post-bureaucratic, and does NOT involve being set up in a
> > >>>>> permanent, "never finished" contract with a hospital, bank or
> > >>>>> phone company to reflect on one's own process. Kind of like being
> on
> > a permanent research retainer!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Somewhere along the line Engestrom has lost sight of fact that
> > >>>>> work is significantly related to earning a living, at least for
> most
> > people.
> > >>>>> Maybe the concept is lost in translation. I suggest that he use a
> > >>>>> different word, however. "Creative exploration, " for example. But
> > >>>>> not "work"!!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Helena Worthen
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> From: <ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>>
> > >>>>> Reply-To: "eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>> Date: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 7:52 AM
> > >>>>> To: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
> > >>>>> Cc: "eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>> Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Here is an paper where Yro discusses the "germ cell".
> > >>>>> http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/people/engestro/files/The_Finn
> > >>>>> ish _ proposal.pdf thought people might be interested, also rather
> > >>>>> short eric
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>> <mailto:-----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu> wrote: -----
> > >>>>> To: lchcmike@gmail.com <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > >>>>> From: Andy Blunden
> > >>>>> Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>> Date: 06/18/2013 12:17AM
> > >>>>> Cc: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>> Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> To the extent that we have a consultant who is invited to resolve
> > >>>>> problems in an institution of some kind, if the impact on that the
> > >>>>> life of that institution can be validly abstracted from the other
> > >>>>> projects at work, such as governments, political or ethnic groups
> > >>>>> with grievances, patients who are campaigning to have a say in
> > >>>>> their health care, governments imposing cost-cutting and computer
> > >>>>> work-control systems intended to take the teachers out of
> > >>>>> education, and the nurses out of health care, etc. ... In other
> > >>>>> words, to the extent that the idea of a "system of actions" or
> > "system of activity"
> > >>>>> with a neat boundary accurately reflects the social situation at
> > >>>>> issue, then I am sure the method of the triangle works fine.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> But what about the Egyptian Revolution, when workers (white collar
> > >>>>> public servants and highly exploited factory workers) and
> > >>>>> student-intellectuals all enter into a struggle against the
> > >>>>> US-backed torture-regime of Hosni Mubarak (with a mass of ruraal
> > >>>>> poor in the background), ... without knowing what they are wanting
> > >>>>> to achieve, not necessarily trusting the other parties,...? What
> > >>>>> about when gay men suddenly find themselves not only the target of
> > >>>>> an unknown deadly disease, but being blamed for spreading it to
> > >>>>> others, and the medical scientists want to use them as guinea
> > >>>>> pigs, they are threatened with bring forced to wear the equivalent
> > >>>>> of a Star of David, ... and yet they manage to not only defeat the
> > >>>>> disease but come out if it having won a huge victory agains
> > homophobia and much improved social status.
> > >>>>> Wht about when the asbestos industry is marketing a miracle fibre
> > >>>>> which is still, a decade after it was eventually banned, killing
> > >>>>> 1000s in a horrible slow death, and the trade unions representing
> > >>>>> the workers are hand in glove with their employers, government
> > >>>>> regulators are being paid off and medical scientists (like the
> > >>>>> ones who told us tobacco is good for your health) are spreadig
> > >>>>> disinformation, ... and yet we got asbestos banned. Need I go on?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I don't believe the "system of activity" approach can even get a
> > >>>>> handle on those situations. As you know I am in the process of
> > >>>>> editing a volume of studies using (to one extent or another) the
> > "project"
> > >>>>> approach, to understand these processes, for the purpose of doing
> > things like this.
> > >>>>> It includes idenfiying contradictions in the workings of
> > >>>>> institutions (such as medical science, health care, industrial
> > >>>>> diseases regulation, and so on) but it also deals with complex
> > >>>>> processes of social change, where the participants themselves are
> > >>>>> only just discovering what it is they are fighting for, and
> multiple
> > projects are in play.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> These are the kind of issues I am interested in, so that is why I
> > >>>>> am interested in a theory which can deal with such issues,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Andy
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> mike cole wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> I fear this does not help me a whole lot, Andy.
> > >>>>>> Sorry I cannot grasp the method of Goethe properly. I guess Luria
> > >>>>>> probably failed as well. Or maybe he succeeded and I have
> > >>>>>> misunderstood him? Entirely possible.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I did not ask what what is at odds. I asked for what the
> > >>>>>> empirical consequences of the the distinctions you are making
> > >>>>>> are. I cannot follow the path to reforming all of the educational
> > >>>>>> system of the USSR or Russia, which, so far as I know, neither
> > >>>>>> Vygotsky nor anyone else associated with Activity Theory every
> > >>>>>> accomplished. Nore have I ever seen claims that they have. (The
> > >>>>>> Finns appear to have done well recently using an approach, the
> > >>>>>> relationship to activity theory I have no knowledge of, but
> perhaps
> > our Finnish colleagues do).
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Here is what would help me, and I suspect others on XMCA. Take an
> > >>>>>> already published piece of work that uses the expanded triangle
> > >>>>>> Yrjo proposes in Learning by Expanding. Say, the work on cleaners
> > >>>>>> in the early work. Tell us about the mistaken conclusions that
> > >>>>>> arise because of misunderstandings that confusion of the triangle
> > >>>>>> for "activity" (no
> > >>>>>> modifiers) causes. Suggest how we might improve our understanding.
> > >>>>>> Or tell us why that example works, but some other example
> > >>>>>> (teachers in schools, nurses and doctors in a hospital, etc.) does
> > not.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Or suggest an entirely different way of looking at matters so
> > >>>>>> that when we go into classrooms, housing projects, work places,
> > >>>>>> we can more effectively understand what is going on and be of
> > >>>>>> more help to those with whom we work that publishing another
> > article in MCA.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I guess I am asking that you rise to the concrete here, keeping
> > >>>>>> the object of analysis constant.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> My apologies if this seems unreasonable. Perhaps it is
> > >>>>>> approaching senility, but I am failing to track you.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> mike
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Lost in the words here.
> > >>>>>> mike
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Yes, in Yjro's (1986) words, it is a "root model". (The
> > >>>>>> derivation of it is a beautiful piece of work, too, close to
> > >>>>>> Hegel's early "System of Ethical Life". Deserves to remain in
> > print).
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> But modelling a complex process is not the same as the method of
> > >>>>>> Goethe, Hegel, Marx and Vygotsky. As you know, Mike, in order to
> > >>>>>> understand this approach, which Luria called Romantic Science, I
> > >>>>>> had to go back to its origins c. 1787 when Goethe was doing his
> > >>>>>> Journey in Italy, studying all the plant life, and its variation
> > >>>>>> by altitude, latittude, nearness to the sea, etc., and in
> > >>>>>> conversation with J G Herder, arrived a his conception of
> > >>>>>> Urphaenomen. The Urphaenomen is not a model.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> It is an abstraction, true. And yes, the understanding of a
> > >>>>>> complex process by the "romantic" method is indeed, the rising to
> > >>>>>> the concrete, the logical-historical reconstruction of the whole
> > >>>>>> process from this abstract germ.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> As I remarked (somewhere) I find Yrjo's work over the past couple
> > >>>>>> of years, which focuses more on the germ cell than the triangle,
> > >>>>>> closer to what I am trying to do. The germ cell is not a model
> > either.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> What is at odds here is whether a real, complex situation (such
> > >>>>>> as reforming the education system in a nation in Africa, rather
> > >>>>>> than in the USSR or Finland) can be based on a conception which
> > >>>>>> isolates a "system of activity", whilst dozens of different
> > >>>>>> ethnic groups, NGOs, government(s), trade unions and so on, are
> > >>>>>> all contesting the aims and benefits of "education." Every person
> > >>>>>> in such a situation is committed to more than one project, and
> > >>>>>> deploys concepts (institutionalised projects) frequently at odds
> > with one another.
> > >>>>>> What is needed is a process whose basic units are (1) units and
> > >>>>>> not systems, and (2) processes of development, processes in which
> > >>>>>> people are struggling to realise ideas, processes of formation.
> > >>>>>> And we need the algebra through which such units interact with
> > >>>>>> one another, rather than declaring any single such interaction to
> > >>>>>> be an entire new "unit" - i.e. coupled systems.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Andy
> > >>>>>> mike cole wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Isn't the trangle a "model, " Andy? A model of the root metaphor.
> > >>>>>> Still an abstraction... waiting to see if it can rise to the
> > >>>>>> concrete? Perhaps?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Empirically speaking, what is at odds here? For whom?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> mike
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Antti, I was directing my question to you and your remarks.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> In Engestrom's highlky regarded, now out of print, 1987 text
> > >>>>>> "Learning by Expanding", the famous triangle logo is given as
> > >>>>>> Figure 2.6, and after a long consideration of "candidates" for
> > >>>>>> triangle: "The
> > >>>>>> model of Figure 2.6 may now be compared with the four criteria of
> > >>>>>> a root model of human activity, set forth earlier in this
> chapter."
> > >>>>>> and goes on to list and consider the criteria which are commonly
> > >>>>>> associated in this current with the notion of "unit of analysis."
> > >>>>>> (numerous citations are not required). But he never said that the
> > >>>>>> triangle is a unit of analaysis, and it is not, and cannot be. He
> > >>>>>> said it is a root model and it is. The root model is a system
> > >>>>>> concept, not a unit of analysis.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Do you think it possible that this has been the source of some
> > >>>>>> confusion?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Andy
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Antti Rajala wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thanks Andy for sharing the wikipedia text, and your thoughts
> > >>>>>> about the issue! The thoughts about unit of analysis were my own
> > >>>>>> interpretation of the study, and I am not sure if the issue you
> > >>>>>> raised concerns the original study.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Warm wishes, Antti
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Antti, here is a link to th eWikipedia on "System concept"
> > >>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System
> > >>>>>> Why do Activity Theorists in Engstrom's current of thinking mix
> > >>>>>> up the idea of a system concept with a unit of analysis?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Andy
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Antti Rajala wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Greg,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> "My question is getting at where we locate "agency". In
> > >>>>>> individuals alone?
> > >>>>>> Or as possibly being distributed among multiple people and
> > >>>>>> perhaps in amanner that isn't recognizable to the individual. But
> > >>>>>> maybe there is aconcept for that that is different from "double
> > >>>>>> stimulation."
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I think that double stimulation can be analyzed not only at the
> > >>>>>> individual level but at the collective level as well.
> > >>>>>> Actually,
> > >>>>>> the study
> > >>>>>> of Engeström
> > >>>>>> and Sannino (2013) that I referred to in my earlier email gives a
> > >>>>>> nice example. The study also involves in some respects a similar
> > >>>>>> situation as the one that you described having taken place with
> > >>>>>> the workers in Malaysia.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> According to my reading, the study describes a change laboratory
> > >>>>>> intervention taking place in a university library. The library as
> > >>>>>> invited researchers to help them find new forms of work with
> > >>>>>> research groups. A first stimulus emerges in the course of the
> > >>>>>> change laboratory intervention, as a member of one of the
> > >>>>>> research groups that the university library is delivering
> > >>>>>> services says that they can find these services in the internet
> > >>>>>> without the help of the library. Thus a problem emerges for the
> > >>>>>> librarians to collectively produce a service that would be
> > >>>>>> genuinely helpful for the research groups.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> In solving this problem, they organize their collective action
> > >>>>>> with the help of a second stimulus, namely the concept of
> > >>>>>> knotworking (Engeström, Engeström & Vähäaho, 1999) that the
> > >>>>>> researchers have introduced in the beginning of the change
> > >>>>>> laboratory. In particular, a new working group, a knot, is formed
> > >>>>>> that starts to work with the emergent problem of inventing a
> useful
> > service.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> What is in my opinion very innovative, Engeström and Sannino also
> > >>>>>> provide an example of this second stimulus, the concept of
> > >>>>>> knotworking, becoming an initial theoretical generalization that
> > >>>>>> is reworked and enriched through a process of ascending from
> > >>>>>> abstract to concrete as the intervention evolves.
> > >>>>>> Specifically, in the end of the intervention, the concept of
> > >>>>>> knotworking gives rise to many concrete, practical applications
> > >>>>>> of the librarians' work at multiple levels of hierarchy.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> As for the unit of analysis, I think that the unit of analysis in
> > >>>>>> the study is the intersection of several activity systems, the
> > >>>>>> university libarary and the research groups, In terms of agency,
> > >>>>>> one can maybe talk about shared transformative agency in which
> > >>>>>> the subject is not an individual but a collective. (More about
> > >>>>>> shared transformative agency, see Virkkunen's paper in
> > >>>>>> http://www.activites.org/v3n1/v3n1.book.pdf#page=43)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Best wishes, Antti
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 6:57 PM,
> > >>>>>> <ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> forgot to send this to XMCA
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----Forwarded by ERIC RAMBERG/spps on
> > >>>>>> 06/06/2013
> > >>>>>> 10:56AM
> > >>>>>> -----
> > >>>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>>
> > >>>>>> From: ERIC RAMBERG/spps
> > >>>>>> Date: 06/06/2013 09:05AM
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> True true, the history of philosophy does lead there Andy.
> > >>>>>> But that leads
> > >>>>>> to my trepidations regarding ideology lacking in practice.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> What substance within conscious formation is measurable?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I believe that answer has yet to be found perhaps?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> eric
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> <mailto:-----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>>> wrote: -----
> > >>>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
> > >>>>>> <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>>
> > >>>>>> From: Andy Blunden
> > >>>>>> Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>> Date: 06/05/2013 08:42PM
> > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Eric,
> > >>>>>> By posiing the problem as that of the Kantian dilemma, of
> > >>>>>> unifying two disparate abstractions, you determine the answer as
> > >>>>>> from the history of philosophy and the answer is Hegel's
> > >>>>>> formation of
> > >>>>>> consciousness" or Gestalt des Bewusstsein.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Andy
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
> > >>>>>> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>> I believe that
> > >>>>>> this discussion needs to
> > >>>>>> involve "unit
> > >>>>>> of analysis" for
> > >>>>>> what it is that provides the
> > >>>>>> mediational method.
> > >>>>>> What unit of study can properly
> > >>>>>> encapsulate
> > >>>>>> that which
> > >>>>>> is being observed?
> > >>>>>> Activity? Concept? Word? Mirror Neuron?
> > >>>>>> Oh my what a great temptest LSV did let out of the teapot eric
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> <mailto:-----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>>> wrote: -----
> > >>>>>> To: "xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>"
> > >>>>>> <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>>
> > >>>>>> From: Achilles Delari Junior
> > >>>>>> Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>> Date: 06/05/2013 07:04AM
> > >>>>>> Subject: RE: [xmca] Double Stimulation?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Sure, Greg,
> > >>>>>> Well, seems to me that "draw analogies between different domains
> > >>>>>> of their worlds" is closer to "meaning construction" than to
> > >>>>>> choice a "stimulus medium" to help memory tasks, for instance.
> > >>>>>> The "double
> > >>>>>> stimulation" is fine because
> > >>>>>> introduces a kind of
> > >>>>>> mediation between a
> > >>>>>> stimulus and our response to the
> > >>>>>> stimulus. But,
> > >>>>>> following Vygotsky's
> > >>>>>> formulations at that time this new series of "stimulus" (a nude,
> > >>>>>> a word, etc) act also as a stimulus, a conditioned one.
> > >>>>>> If you change
> > >>>>>> you paradigm to the proposition that all sign implies any kind of
> > >>>>>> "generalization process" (meaning) that differs in their
> > >>>>>> structure and has a genetic construction (see the studies about
> > >>>>>> concepts, for instance), a sign could not be only a second series
> > >>>>>> of stimuli ruled by the same laws that a conditional reflex...
> > >>>>>> As in
> > >>>>>> "Instrumental
> > >>>>>> method": S-------X-------R. Where the relation S---------R is a
> > >>>>>> direct stimulus response relationship, but when you introduce a
> > >>>>>> second series of stimulus "X" (double stimulation) you have an
> > >>>>>> indirect stimulus response relationship, but the relation between
> > >>>>>> S and X, and X and R remain a conditioned reflex relationship...
> > >>>>>> "Draw analogies between different domains of our worlds" seem to
> > >>>>>> mean that we are in transit between different words of
> > >>>>>> signification, and culture is a human production that involves the
> > "generalization"
> > >>>>>> from a
> > >>>>>> world to another,
> > >>>>>> broader, maybe not exactly more
> > >>>>>> precise, but
> > >>>>>> "broader", in my opinion.
> > >>>>>> I don't know...
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> "In natural memory a direct associative (conditional
> > >>>>>> reflex)
> > >>>>>> connection A?B is established between two stimuli A and B. In
> > >>>>>> artificial, mnemotechnic memory of the same impression, by means
> > >>>>>> of a psychological tool X (a knot in a handkerchief, a mnemonic
> > >>>>>> scheme) instead of the direct connection A?B two new ones are
> > >>>>>> established: A?X
> > >>>>>> and X?B Just like the connection A?B each of them is a natural
> > >>>>>> conditional reflex process, determined, by the properties of the
> > >>>>>> brain tissue. What is new, artificial, and instrumental is the
> > >>>>>> fact of the replacement of one connection A?B by two
> > >>>>>> connections:
> > >>>>>> A?X and X?B They
> > >>>>>> lead to the same result, but by a different path. What is new is
> > >>>>>> the artificial direction which the instrument gives to the
> > >>>>>> natural process of establishing a conditional connection, i.e.,
> > >>>>>> the active utilization of the natural properties of brain
> > >>>>>> tissue."
> > >>>>>> Vygotsky
> > >>>>>> "The Instumental
> > >>>>>> Method" (this is 1930)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1930/instrumental.
> > >>>>>> htm
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> But already in 1928:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> "Let us now compare the natural and cultural mnemonics of a
> > >>>>>> child. The relation between the two forms can be graphically
> > >>>>>> expressed by means of a triangle: in case of natural memorization
> > >>>>>> a direct associative or conditional reflexive connection is set
> > >>>>>> up between two points, A and B. In case of mnemotechnical
> > >>>>>> memorization, utilizing some sign, instead of one associative
> > >>>>>> connection AB, the others are set up AX and BX, which bring us to
> > >>>>>> the same result, but in a roundabout way.
> > >>>>>> Each of these connections AX and BX is the same kind of
> > >>>>>> conditional-reflexive process of connection as AB."
> > >>>>>> Vygotsky (1928)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1929/cultural_deve
> > >>>>>> lop
> > >>>>>> ment.htm
> > >>>>>> See: "AX and BX
> > >>>>>> is the same kind of
> > >>>>>> conditional-reflexive process of
> > >>>>>> connection as AB." --> The same
> > >>>>>> kind... This
> > >>>>>> will not be the
> > >>>>>> same in 1933-34...
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> "(Introduction: the importance of the sign; its social meaning).
> > >>>>>> In older works we ignored that the sign has meaning. < But there
> > >>>>>> is "a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones
> > together"
> > >>>>>> (Ecclesiastes). > We proceeded from the principle of the
> > >>>>>> constancy of meaning, we discounted meaning. But the problem of
> > >>>>>> meaning was already present in the older investigations.
> > >>>>>> Whereas
> > >>>>>> before
> > >>>>>> our task was to
> > >>>>>> demonstrate what "the knot" and
> > >>>>>> logical memory
> > >>>>>> have in
> > >>>>>> common, now our
> > >>>>>> task is to demonstrate the difference that exists between
> > >>>>>> them.From our works it follows that the sign changes the
> > >>>>>> interfunctional relationships." (Vygotsky, 1933-34)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1934/problem-consc
> > >>>>>> iou
> > >>>>>> sness.htm
> > >>>>>> And now?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thank you.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Achilles.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Date:
> > >>>>>> Tue, 4 Jun 2013 18:31:23 -0600
> > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Double
> > >>>>>> Stimulation?
> > >>>>>> From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>>>
> > >>>>>> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Achilles,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Sounded interesting, but I'm not
> > >>>>>> sure I
> > >>>>>> followed
> > >>>>>> you completely. You
> > >>>>>> say
> > >>>>>> that
> > >>>>>> Strathern's quote seems like it has a broader application that
> > >>>>>> "double
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> stimulation", but I could use some help with the rest of your
> > >>>>>> message.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> If you have a few minutes, maybe
> > >>>>>> you could try
> > >>>>>> rephrasing?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -greg
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 4:11 PM,
> > >>>>>> Achilles
> > >>>>>> Delari
> > >>>>>> Junior <
> > >>>>>> achilles_delari@hotmail.com <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> In my undertanding, this is very
> > >>>>>> more powerful than
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> double
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> stimulation... Double stimulation could be overcoming with
> > >>>>>> another
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> way for
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> think signs than "medium stimulus" - See "The problem of
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> consciousness"
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> (1933-34), for instance. The more important will be not the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> similarity
> > >>>>>> between
> > >>>>>> a nude and a word, but their
> > >>>>>> difference, "before was
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> forgotten that
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> sign had a meaning" and "now" the meaning must be take in
> > >>>>>> account.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Double
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> stimulation, in my understanding, do not resists to this new
> > >>>>>> point
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> of view.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Achilles.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 06:19:04 -0600
> > >>>>>> From:
> > >>>>>> greg.a.thompson@gmail.com <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>>>
> > >>>>>> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>;
> > >>>>>> lchcmike@gmail.com <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com> <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com>> <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com> <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com
> > >>>>>> <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com>>>;
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> antti.rajala@helsinki.fi <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi
> > >>>>>> <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi
> > >>>>>> <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi
> > >>>>>> <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> CC:
> > >>>>>> Subject: [xmca] Double
> > >>>>>> Stimulation?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I wonder if this quote by
> > >>>>>> Marilyn
> > >>>>>> Strathern can be productively
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> connected
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> (not necessarily geneaologically, but
> > >>>>>> ideologically) to the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> notion of
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> "double stimulation" (which I am
> > >>>>>> just now
> > >>>>>> trying to figure out):
> > >>>>>> "Culture consists in the way
> > >>>>>> people draw
> > >>>>>> analogies between
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> different
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> domains of their worlds" (1992: 47).
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -greg
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > >>>>>> Visiting Assistant Professor
> > >>>>>> Department of Anthropology
> > >>>>>> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > >>>>>> Brigham Young University
> > >>>>>> Provo, UT 84602
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>>> _____
> > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>>> _____
> > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > >>>>>> Visiting Assistant Professor
> > >>>>>> Department of Anthropology
> > >>>>>> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > >>>>>> Brigham Young University
> > >>>>>> Provo, UT 84602
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>>> _____
> > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>>> _____
> > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>> ---
> > >>>>>> ----
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>>> _____
> > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>> ---
> > >>>>>> ----
> > >>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
> > >>>>>> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> > >>>>>> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> > >>>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>>> _____
> > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>>> _____
> > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>>> _____
> > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>> ---
> > >>>>>> ----
> > >>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
> > >>>>>> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> > >>>>>> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> > >>>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>>> _____
> > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>> ---
> > >>>>>> ----
> > >>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
> > >>>>>> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> > >>>>>> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> > >>>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>>> _____
> > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>> ---
> > >>>>>> ----
> > >>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>> ---
> > >>>>> -
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> *Andy Blunden*
> > >>>>> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> > >>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>>> _____
> > >>>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>> __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list
> > >>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>> ---
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> *Andy Blunden*
> > >>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >>>>
> > >>>> __________________________________________
> > >>>> _____
> > >>>> xmca mailing list
> > >>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>> ----
> > >>> *Andy Blunden*
> > >>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >>>
> > >>> __________________________________________
> > >>> _____
> > >>> 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
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> --
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> ---
> > >> *Andy Blunden*
> > >> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> __________________________________________
> > >> _____
> > >> 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
> > >
> >
> > --
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *Andy Blunden*
> > Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________
> > _____
> > 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
>

--
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Visiting Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602