[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xmca-l] Re: how to broaden/enliven the xmca discussion
- To: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: how to broaden/enliven the xmca discussion
- From: mike cole <email@example.com>
- Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 21:13:37 -0700
- In-reply-to: <5430A706.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-archive: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l>
- List-help: <mailto:email@example.com?subject=help>
- List-id: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l.mailman.ucsd.edu>
- List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-subscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <CAGaCnpzDt0vD9CFRLy7Nuu8Je57OqqdR-Cp=NQ3VB4EcdzY55Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAGaCnpzxkW7kT4ysX6oo+7JyUW84j7NHU=K2OFCLkegCQMGc=A@mail.gmail.com> <CAGaCnpzM4-cqRDLiX+dxGytCyz5StJY6yThAkPWc=dRD_x-c=Q@mail.gmail.com> <920FE8E7-F60A-4899-82D6-DAB960917575@uniandes.edu.co> <CAHCnM0C9mFjG5kSqupqw=CjgJGsjU-fR2+OTMm4byDQtqqRuWg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ750_wEP4VA_ELNPYOXqU9uF-ip3FF4Xy2sFnjnqLAj8XYVGQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAHCnM0D_kEABGh-FAA=UrL5_NfQgAzTPL3LQffjOTsZhfsWrNQ@mail.gmail.com> <5430A706.email@example.com>
- Reply-to: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: <email@example.com>
Those certainly seem like lively topics, Andy.
I had in mind specifically topics that are on peoples' minds that go U
discussed. I hope that the time spent at ISCAR produces a shower of
interesting ideas. Isn't that the object of such gatherings? (Whatever
object means!). :-). The Nardi and Kaptelinin chapter on basics of AT is
one good source, but it seems the problem is intractable!
On Saturday, October 4, 2014, Andy Blunden <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I don't know, but it's hardly surprising if things were a little slow this
> last week as a lot of xmca-ers are also iscar-ers and we were all chatting
> like crazy in Sydney at the ISCAR Congress. Everyone (and I mean everyone,
> including every passenger on a Sydney suburban train as well) has their
> iPhones and tablets etc., so they could read/write on xmca, but I guess
> they were oversupplied with correspondents and protagonists.
> My impressions of CHAT research:
> On the positive side: very diverse, and at its best, sharp and critical in
> relation to the dominant political forces, and still way out in front in
> understanding the several developmental processes which all contribute to
> our actions (phylogenesis, historical genesis, mesogenesis, ontogenesis,
> microgenesis), and not focussing on just one. And I have to say it is a
> great community of research, relatively lacking in the competitiveness and
> jealousy which infects most research communities.
> On the negative side:
> * Most CHAT people still have a concept of "society" as some
> homogeneous, abstract entity which introduces problems into the
> social situation on which they try to focus, i.e., people lack a
> viable social theory or the ability to use theory they have to
> analyse the wider social situation in a differentiated way.
> * The idea of "unit of analysis" is almost lost to us. Only a small
> minority know what it means and use the idea in their research.
> * The concept of "object" is at the centre of a lot of confusion;
> few researchers using the concept are clear on what the concept
> is. This is related to an unwillingness to confront and attempt to
> resolve the methodological differences (I refer to systematic
> difference, rather than accidental misunderstandings) within the
> CHAT community; perhaps it's fear of losing the relatively civil
> relations between researchers - people prefer to let differences
> just fester without openly discussing them. The old Soviet
> approach is gone, but perhaps we have gone too far the other way. :)
> *Andy Blunden*
> mike cole wrote:
>> Hi-- I assume you grabbed it from my erroneous response to someone who
>> wrote backto xmca instead of me.
>> Had dinner with tim ingold yesterday evening. Such an interesting and
>> unassuming guy.
>> Any ideas about how to broaden/enliven the xmca discussion??
It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with an
object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.