[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse
Hi Mike, David, Annalisa and Everyone,
Tricia Kress ( U Mass Boston) and I are researching these topics for a book
on social imagination we are writing
so this thread is very timely. I am also thinking about Mark Turner's
notion of "conceptual blending" in connection to "chaining" and associative
reasoning. see http://markturner.org/blending.html
Could it be that this is in evidence in "preliterate" cultures and predates
"Western" thought a la Plato, Aristotle not to mention Descartes and the
This is a sincere, non rhetorical question.
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:43 AM, mike cole <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Is this equivalent to what Vygotsky referred to as chaining?
> But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established
> is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our
> conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts
> conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of
> these linked concepts.
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:29 AM, David H Kirshner <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Annalisa,
> > Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with
> > that logic is not gendered.
> > I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a
> > Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition."
> > What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very much a
> > part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive scientists
> > have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is
> > associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively
> > linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our
> > reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts.
> > One of the classical studies that established this perspective concerns
> > Margie the bank teller:
> > Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with
> > issues of social justice.
> > What is more likely
> > A) Margie is a bank teller, or
> > B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist.
> > (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer it.)
> > ...
> > The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank teller
> > than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A includes the
> > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist as well as the
> > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a feminist, but choice B
> > includes only one of those possibilities.
> > But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the
> > cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our
> > associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical conditions
> > the problem.
> > In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a
> > Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of
> > association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and I should
> add, I
> > don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based sex differences in
> > cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist scholars have rightly
> > pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and that prior assertions of
> > biologically based sex differences in cognition over-interpret the
> > scientific results.) Neither history nor biology is determinative, and
> > logic is too important a part of our cultural legacy to deny any
> > or group the opportunity to master it.
> > David
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
> > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar
> > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <email@example.com>; Vera
> > John-Steiner <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse
> > Hi,
> > About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed
> > logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in
> > the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted
> > to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken?
> > In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated:
> > "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv
> > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in
> > prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly
> > rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv."
> > So I was responding to that paragraph.
> > I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an
> > intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight
> > might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about
> > makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to
> > the case.
> > Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can
> > partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and
> > knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation.
> > What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are
> > for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize
> > activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does
> > make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by
> > power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others,
> > which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does
> > require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless?
> > Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is
> > constructed:
> > "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into
> > genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group
> > order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be
> > taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not
> > because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the
> > I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that
> > logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a
> > logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't
> > mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a
> > hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the
> > same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use.
> > The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic
> > itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers,
> > rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of
> > hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are
> > different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the
> > despite those boundaries.
> > Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human
> > cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the
> > to be wrong about that.
> > Kind regards,
> > Annalisa
Robert Lake Ed.D.
Social Foundations of Education
Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading
Georgia Southern University
P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460
Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group
Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be
born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John
and Education*,1916, p. 139