[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xmca-l] Re: in the eye of the beholder
- To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <email@example.com>
- Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: in the eye of the beholder
- From: "Glassman, Michael" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 03:19:15 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US
- Authentication-results: spf=pass (sender IP is 188.8.131.52) email@example.com;
- In-reply-to: <A3F303D1-4792-4873-9654-85CDF395AD46@gmail.com>
- List-archive: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l>
- List-help: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=help>
- List-id: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l.mailman.ucsd.edu>
- List-post: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-subscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <7d282232e4bb411bb62a403f1a6535d8@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <AA78E8D8-5BE6-406E-BFD2-FC9727525C9A@gmail.com> <CAHCnM0Cxyn+nAyR1bt3MZv+T+T2qf+YS1ph4HVst6YxCLD347Q@mail.gmail.com> <6A00015B-8057-47C1-89A0-C36B0B2DC48F@gmail.com> <8F385CC13313CC47B866739C3A4BC3110222765F@TIS103.uopnet.plymouth.ac.uk> <510061CD-C73C-4738-B8E7-105991F8BC65@gmail.com> <251E31BF-D2B2-4174-A4EF-5DFA710974EC@uniandes.edu.co>, <A3F303D1-4792-4873-9654-85CDF395AD46@gmail.com>
- Reply-to: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: <email@example.com>
- Thread-index: Ac/VhyXGG96+0EXKSwa5bC8CairLbgASa/KAAALtiIAAAbbWAAAJSOOAAAbFJwAAADQBgAAA1wcA///WVHA=
- Thread-topic: [Xmca-l] Re: in the eye of the beholder
It seems to me that articles like this can be a double edged sword. They use examples where culture has an influence on how we see things but then offer the generalization that science is perspective. This is the same line you hear by climate deniers who claim that the climatologists have a liberal bias. Science is based on individual perspective until it doesn't. I'm their book is a much more nuanced discussion. This is a really complex issue which at this particular moment has extraordinary import. Maybe we need to find other ways to discuss this - like warranted assertability. Perhaps I have been spending too much time reading about the politics of climate change lately and it has spooked me.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [email@example.com] on behalf of David Preiss [firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 9:41 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: in the eye of the beholder
And they make claims for all humankind.
Enviado desde mi iPhone
> El 21-09-2014, a las 22:16, Martin John Packer <email@example.com> escribió:
> So there are two distinct problems here: First, the researchers are not diverse. Second, the people they (we?) study are not diverse.
>> On Sep 21, 2014, at 8:11 PM, David Preiss <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Loved the WEIRD acronym. One of the best ironies I've seen in recent scientific writing.
>> Enviado desde mi iPhone
>>> El 21-09-2014, a las 18:57, Rod Parker-Rees <R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> escribió:
>>> Great article, David - highlights the importance (at every level) of being aware of what others might find odd about us (secondary socialisation?).
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of David Preiss
>>> Sent: 21 September 2014 18:31
>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: in the eye of the beholder
>>> This article is revelant for this topic: http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~henrich/pdfs/WeirdPeople.pdf
>>> Enviado desde mi iPhone
>>>> El 21-09-2014, a las 13:42, mike cole <email@example.com> escribió:
>>>> The book by Medin and Bang, "Who's asking" published by MIT is GREAT
>>>> reading. Seeing this in Scientific American is super.
>>>> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 8:18 AM, David Preiss <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>>>> What a fantastic piece Peter! Loved the references to primatology.
>>>>> Enviado desde mi iPhone
>>>>>> El 21-09-2014, a las 7:31, Peter Smagorinsky <email@example.com> escribió:
>>>> Development and Evolution are both ... "processes of construction and
>>>> re- construction in which heterogeneous resources are contingently but
>>>> more or less reliably reassembled for each life cycle." [Oyama,
>>>> Griffiths, and Gray, 2001]
>>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form.