[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: Contrasting 'use-value' & 'value'



Would it help our understand of "wording" any to know that David is a
painter (and quite a good one!)?

Someone else has put this much more elegantly than this, but we might ask,
(in parallel fashion to word and wording): Is the meaning in the paint or
in the painting?

-greg



On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 8:23 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sometimes the answer to a question depends on the answer to a question.
> Like:
>
> A: Can I have a beer?
> B: Are you eighteen?
>
> So if you tell me that "life" and "living" are two different words, then I
> will tell you that they are not ineffable: you can say for example that a
> "life" is an instance of "living", or perhaps that "living" is an instance
> of "life", and the explanation isn't circular. But if you tell me that
> "life" and "living" are just two different wordings of the same meaning,
> then I will say that word meaning is ineffable, in the sense that the only
> way to define it is in terms of itself.
>
> All word meanings are ineffable in this rather general sense. In order to
> explain them, we need other words and other word meanings. Teachers run
> into this problem all the time when they try to teach words with
> flashcards: If I am teaching the word "kick" and I have a flashcard with a
> foot kicking a ball, the child really doesn't know if I am teaching the
> meaning "foot", or "ball" or "football" or whatever. The only way to
> disambiguate the picture is with words, and that's true of any word meaning
> you care to think of. Wittgenstein has a somewhat more elaborate version of
> this argument, but I prefer to stick to situations I myself have
> experienced (meaning situations that, as Vandy says, I myself have
> transformed into a system of word meanings).
>
> We have a system of wordings that tends to privilege entities over
> processes. Halliday says that dynamism and synopticity are complementary:
> there isn't any sense in which "living" is somehow closer to reality than
> "life", and so there also isn't any sense in which one is closer to
> idealization than the other. Nevertheless, as Virginia Woolf knew, "Life
> stand still here" is a much harder trick to pull off, and it takes kids
> many more years to master it.
>
> David Kellogg
> Macquarie University
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>
> > Since you answer my question with a question, I take it that the answer
> is
> > "yes."
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > Andy Blunden
> > http://home.mira.net/~andy
> > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
> > On 26/04/2017 11:56 AM, David Kellogg wrote:
> >
> >> Andy--
> >>
> >> Are "life" and "living" two different words, or are they two different
> >> wordings of the same word?
> >>
> >> David Kellogg
> >> Macquarie University
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> >> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     David, after reading this fascinating 2-page narrative
> >>     about Ricoeur and the structuralists out of the blue
> >>     we get the conclusion: "And the power is not in the
> >>     word, but in the wording." Have I missed something? Is
> >>     "wording" ineffable?
> >>
> >>     Andy
> >>
> >>     ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>     Andy Blunden
> >>     http://home.mira.net/~andy <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy>
> >>     http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-
> decision-making
> >>     <http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-
> >> decision-making>
> >>
> >>     On 26/04/2017 7:13 AM, David Kellogg wrote:
> >>
> >>         I remember Paul Ricoeur. He taught at a seminary
> >>         at the University of
> >>         Chicago when I was an undergraduate. I was a
> >>         member of the campus Spartacus
> >>         Youth Club, and it was the only place that would
> >>         allow us a public space
> >>         for meetings. I tried to sell him a copy of "Young
> >>         Spartacus" once: I can't
> >>         remember if he bought it or not. But I remember
> >>         him as a French gentleman,
> >>         personally quite conservative, but not at all put
> >>         off by the presence of
> >>         a screaming red nineteen year old who for
> >>         inexplicable reasons had
> >>         a Parisian accent and spoke the argot of the
> >>         Versailles banlieue. Maybe he
> >>         bought our French paper, Le Bolchevik.
> >>
> >>         I have been reading a symposium "On Narrative"
> >>         that was going on at UC when
> >>         I was organizing against Milton Friedman's Nobel
> >>         Prize (he was also a
> >>         professor there at the time--he won the prize the
> >>         same year that Saul
> >>         Bellow, another UC professor, did). Ricoeur,
> >>         Derrida, and Hayden White all
> >>         took part.
> >>
> >>         It was the heyday of structuralism, and Ricoeur's
> >>         contribution is
> >>         interesting because it's quite ANTI-structuralist:
> >>         he points out that the
> >>         effect of structuralism on narrative studies has
> >>         been to de-historicize,
> >>         de-memorize, dehumanize; to convert stories into
> >>         exchange values rather
> >>         than use values. So the elements that Propp
> >>         discovers in Ludmilla and
> >>         Ruslan (and the Firebird and its variants) can
> >>         come in any order. In
> >>         contrast, even the simplest act of repetition is
> >>         historicized, humanized,
> >>         and memorable. A use value and not an exchange value.
> >>
> >>         Derrida ignores everybody else and embarks on his
> >>         usual verbal
> >>         pyrotechnics, but Hayden White develops Ricoeur's
> >>         idea in a way I think I
> >>         actually used in my "Thinking of Feeling" paper:
> >>         human memory goes through
> >>         stages: medieval annals, Renaissance chronicles,
> >>         and the nineteenth century
> >>         narrative, each of which adds something
> >>         distinctive and makes the
> >>         meta-narrative that they form together into
> >>         something non-reversible and
> >>         developmental. But now I see that the reviewers
> >>         made me remove all that (it
> >>         is just as well: sociogenesis is one story and
> >>         ontogenesis quite another).
> >>
> >>         Ruqaiya Hasan used to say that there is a certain
> >>         unity imposed on
> >>         experience by language, from "the living of life"
> >>         to the child's first real
> >>         morpho-phoneme. If you take the phrase "the living
> >>         of life" just as an
> >>         example, you can see some of what Ricoeur is
> >>         trying to get at. On the face
> >>         of it, the phrase is redundant: the word "life"
> >>         seems to contain absolutely
> >>         nothing that isn't already there in "living". Yet
> >>         "of life" must mean
> >>         something, otherwise it would not enable us to add
> >>         the specifier "the" to
> >>         "living".
> >>
> >>         I think Ricoeur would say that "life" is a kind of
> >>         de-historicized,
> >>         de-memorized, de-humanized "living", one that is
> >>         turned from process into
> >>         entity, and made synoptical, like the various
> >>         retellings in different
> >>         orders of the four Gospels. Yes, it's a powerful
> >>         way of speaking, but it is
> >>         powerful the way that sculpture is rather than the
> >>         way that painting is.
> >>         And the power is not in the word, but in the wording.
> >>
> >>         David Kellogg
> >>         Macquarie University
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>         On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 4:31 AM,
> >>         <lpscholar2@gmail.com
> >>         <mailto:lpscholar2@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>             Mike,
> >>             There is a particular example that occurred
> >>             here when Wolff-Michael
> >>             referenced Ricouer’s 3 volume project
> >>             exploring metaphor and narrativity
> >>             and their common unifying theme existing
> >>             within human temporality
> >>             (finitude).
> >>             Is there an expectation for ‘us’ to go back
> >>             and reference Ricouer’s
> >>             exploration of this relation in depth? Through
> >>             reading and re-reading these
> >>             works of scholarship.
> >>             I myself turned to the preface of Ricouer’s 3
> >>             volume exploration of this
> >>             particular relation,  metaphor/narrativity::
> >>             Temporality.
> >>
> >>             Without human temporality, narrativity and
> >>             metaphor would not exist.
> >>
> >>             On this listserve there was a glance or nod in
> >>             Ricouer’s direction and
> >>             then???.
> >>
> >>             This month we are recycling themes which
> >>             already exist in the archive, but
> >>             is this recycling just repetition,, or
> >>             renovation, or innovation?.
> >>
> >>             Peg’s metaphor of leaving loose threads for
> >>             others to return to expresses
> >>             a temporal sense ability at odds with high
> >>             impact journals.
> >>
> >>
> >>             Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >>
> >>             From: mike cole
> >>             Sent: April 25, 2017 11:02 AM
> >>             To: Larry Purss
> >>             Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>             Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Contrasting
> >>             'use-value' & 'value'
> >>
> >>             Right Larry. A lot of high impact journals
> >>             (not all) are deeply
> >>             a-historical.
> >>
> >>             When my wife and I were writing a textbook, we
> >>             had, with each addition,
> >>             to cut out older refs. To be allow to refer to
> >>             Gesell, Rousseau in a
> >>             serious manner was a constant battle.
> >>
> >>             But what the heck. In a lot of classes that
> >>             use the textbook, students are
> >>             not required to remember or re-cover material
> >>             from the mid-term on the
> >>             final exam. In a course on development in a
> >>             field that makes a big deal of
> >>             sequence and growth over time. Live for the
> >>             moment, no need to know the
> >>             history of behavior in order to understand it.
> >>
> >>             Yes, mediation has not gone away, despite its
> >>             claimed ailments and devious
> >>             traps.  :-)
> >>
> >>             mike
> >>
> >>             On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 2:00 PM,
> >>             <lpscholar2@gmail.com
> >>             <mailto:lpscholar2@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>             So... If more than 10 years old makes thinking
> >>             and thought anethema WHAT
> >>             does that say about the scope of thinking of
> >>             high impact journals?
> >>
> >>             When returning to wording, statement, and
> >>             utterance I hope we also turn
> >>             back to ‘mediation’.
> >>             I have this definition of mediation to
> >>             consider: (carrying across -within
> >>             back/forth) BOTH (giving/receiving) within a
> >>             singular relation
> >>             This is felt differently than mediation:
> >>             (carrying over to the other side)
> >>             which may imply bridges  required for joining
> >>             or linking two pre-existing
> >>             sides (first one and then the other).
> >>
> >>
> >>             Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >>
> >>             From: mike cole
> >>             Sent: April 23, 2017 9:54 AM
> >>             To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>             Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Contrasting 'use-value'
> >>             & 'value'
> >>
> >>             Hi David et al --
> >>
> >>             Found my copy of Cole and Scribner! To my
> >>             relief, it appears that somewhere
> >>             along the way there was a misattribution of
> >>             that quote you posted that
> >>             Hasan criticized and that I wanted to disavow
> >>             (but there it was in black
> >>             and white!).
> >>
> >>             So, apropos, we have a problem of context
> >>             here.  If you look at p. 25 of
> >>             Scribner and Cole, you will find that the
> >>             quotation was in a paper by Cole
> >>             and Gay (1972) (A paper on culture and memory
> >>             in the American
> >>             Anthropologist I had did not recall the date
> >>             of. If you go just one
> >>             sentence above the quotation you find the
> >>             following:
> >>
> >>             *For instance, one anthropologist commented,
> >>             upon hearing about the results
> >>             of our first research in this area (Gay and
> >>             Cole 1967): The reasoning and
> >>             thinking processes of different people in
> >>             different cultures don't differ .
> >>             . . just their values, beliefs, and ways of
> >>             classifying differ [personal
> >>             correspondence ].*
> >>
> >>
> >>             We were *contesting *this statement which was
> >>             the anthropological consensus
> >>             at the time. For those interested in our own
> >>             views at the time,
> >>
> >>             it is best to consult Chapter 8 of that book
> >>             by Cole and Scribner on
> >>             *Culture
> >>             and Thought. *(Its all antiquarian stuff
> >>             anyway. Its now 50 years since the
> >>             first publication of that line of work!
> >>             References more than 10 years old
> >>             are anethema to HIGH IMPACT  journals!  :-)
> >>             and :-(
> >>
> >>
> >>             mike
> >>
> >>
> >>             Which takes the discussion back to the
> >>             discussion of wording, stating, and
> >>             uttering.
> >>
> >>             On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Wolff-Michael
> >>             Roth <
> >>             wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com
> >>             <mailto:wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>                 Julian,
> >>                 I suggest reading Rossi-Landi, and Italian
> >>                 Marxist scholar, where I have
> >>                 taken this:
> >>
> >>                 Like other products of labor, signs,
> >>                 words, expressions,
> >>                 and messages have use value in
> >>                 communication and are subject to exchange,
> >>                 distribution, and consumption; the markets
> >>                 within which these
> >>                 products circulate as commodities are
> >>                 linguistic communities (Rossi-
> >>                 Landi 1983).
> >>
> >>                 An appreciation of his contributions by
> >>                 Cianca Bianchi states: "Through
> >>
> >>             his
> >>
> >>                 "homological schema",
> >>                 material and linguistic production are
> >>                 conceived to be the result of a
> >>                 single process
> >>                 that is particular to human beings and
> >>                 that can best be understood in
> >>
> >>             terms
> >>
> >>                 of work
> >>                 and trade. "
> >>
> >>                 Cheers,
> >>
> >>                 Michael
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>                 ------------------------------
> >> ------------------------------
> >>                 --------------------
> >>                 Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor
> >>                 Applied Cognitive Science
> >>                 MacLaurin Building A567
> >>                 University of Victoria
> >>                 Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2
> >>                 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth
> >>                 <http://web.uvic.ca/%7Emroth>
> >>                 <http://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/
> >>                 <http://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/>>
> >>
> >>                 New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics
> >>                 <https://www.sensepublishers.
> com/catalogs/bookseries/new-
> >>                 <https://www.sensepublishers.
> com/catalogs/bookseries/new-
> >> >
> >>                 directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the-
> >>                 mathematics-of-mathematics/>*
> >>
> >>                 On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Julian
> >>                 Williams <
> >>                 julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk
> >>                 <mailto:julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk>>
> >>                 wrote:
> >>
> >>                     Michael
> >>
> >>                     As you were - so we are entirely in
> >>                     disagreement, then.
> >>
> >>                     For me the E-V and U-V of a dialogic
> >>                     exchange has nothing essentially
> >>
> >>             to
> >>
> >>                     do with the sensual and super sensual
> >>                     moments of the 'word' as per
> >>                     Vygotsky. And I don't see at all how
> >>                     these really confer 'value' in any
> >>                     Marxist sense of the term on
> >>                     speech/utterance (etc etc).
> >>
> >>                     I am guessing that we are back with
> >>                     analogy of 'commodity' and 'word'
> >>
> >>             in
> >>
> >>                     dialogue, rather than a holistic
> >>                     understanding of discourse in the
> >>                     totality of social-economic relations,
> >>                     and so we have made no progress
> >>                     here.
> >>
> >>                     We can take this up another time perhaps.
> >>
> >>                     Julian
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>                     On 22/04/2017 19:47,
> >>                     "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>                     <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> >>                     on behalf of
> >>                     Wolff-Michael Roth"
> >>                     <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>                     <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> >>                     on behalf of
> >>                     wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com
> >>                     <mailto:wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com>>
> >>                     wrote:
> >>
> >>                         Julian,
> >>                         E-V and U-V, but not of the kind
> >>                         that you are talking about, the
> >>
> >>                 abstract
> >>
> >>                         .
> >>                         . . You can look at it like LSV,
> >>                         who emphasizes that the word has a
> >>                         sensible (material) part and a
> >>                         supersensual (ideal) part, not in the
> >>                         abstract, but concretely realized
> >>                         in every exchange. Michael
> >>
> >>                         ------------------------------
> >> -----------------------------
> >>
> >>                     ---------------
> >>
> >>                         ------
> >>                         Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne
> >>                         Professor
> >>                         Applied Cognitive Science
> >>                         MacLaurin Building A567
> >>                         University of Victoria
> >>                         Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2
> >>                         http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth
> >>                         <http://web.uvic.ca/%7Emroth>
> >>                         <http://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/
> >>                         <http://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/>>
> >>
> >>                         New book: *The Mathematics of
> >>                         Mathematics
> >>                         <https://www.sensepublishers.c
> >> om/catalogs/bookseries/new-
> >>                         <https://www.sensepublishers.c
> >> om/catalogs/bookseries/new->
> >>
> >>                     directions-in-mat
> >>
> >>                         hematics-and-science-education
> >> /the-mathematics-of-mathematics/>*
> >>
> >>                         On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 11:38 AM,
> >>                         Julian Williams <
> >>                         julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk
> >>                         <mailto:julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk>>
> >>                         wrote:
> >>
> >>                             M.
> >>
> >>                             Um, hang on a minute - I agree
> >>                             with everything you said here (I
> >>                             think..).
> >>
> >>                             So I suppose this means you
> >>                             agree(d) with me; een though I
> >>                             thought I
> >>
> >>                 was
> >>
> >>                             challenging your view. I
> >>                             thought you were trying to
> >>                             find E-V and U-V
> >>
> >>                 in
> >>
> >>                             the dialogue-in-itself, where
> >>                             I think it's value has to be
> >>
> >>             understood
> >>
> >>                 by
> >>
> >>                             the way it is mediated through
> >>                             the wider field of
> >>                             discourse/practice
> >>                             (i.e.
> >>                             In its meaning/sense in terms
> >>                             of the real exchanges taking
> >>                             place in
> >>                             practice).
> >>
> >>                             So the point is that one can
> >>                             only understand the exchanges
> >>                             taking
> >>
> >>                 place
> >>
> >>                             within the wider context- the
> >>                             worker exchanges 10 hours of
> >>                             labour
> >>
> >>             for
> >>
> >>                             the
> >>                             commodities required to keep
> >>                             themselves alive for a day …
> >>                             but this
> >>
> >>             has
> >>
> >>                             to
> >>                             be understood within the
> >>                             system that allows the
> >>                             capitalist to
> >>
> >>             exploit
> >>
> >>                             those 10 hours for a profit,
> >>                             and pay wages that do not
> >>                             allow the
> >>
> >>                 worker
> >>
> >>                             to
> >>                             purchase the goods they this
> >>                             produce (or their
> >>                             equivalent)…. There
> >>
> >>             are
> >>
> >>                             obvious analogies in discourse
> >>                             too.
> >>
> >>                             Julian
> >>
> >>                             Ps I see I have raised
> >>                             'mediation' now - oops.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>                             On 22/04/2017 19:15,
> >>                             "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>                             <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> >>                             on behalf of
> >>                             Wolff-Michael Roth"
> >>                             <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>                             <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> >>                             on behalf of
> >>                             wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com
> >>                             <mailto:wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com>>
> >>                             wrote:
> >>
> >>                                 Julian,
> >>                                 My sense is that you are
> >>                                 referring to macro-issues,
> >>                                 you need to
> >>
> >>             stand
> >>
> >>                                 back,
> >>                                 abstract, and look from
> >>                                 the outside at a system,
> >>                                 let it unfold in
> >>
> >>                             front of
> >>
> >>                                 your eyes.
> >>
> >>                                 I am concerned with the
> >>                                 actual constitution of
> >>                                 society in
> >>
> >>             individual
> >>
> >>                                 exchanges, actual
> >>                                 relations between two or
> >>                                 more people, the
> >>
> >>                 "ensemble"
> >>
> >>                             of
> >>
> >>                                 which constitutes society
> >>                                 (Marx, Vygotsky,
> >>                                 Leont'ev). I am thus
> >>
> >>                             concerned
> >>
> >>                                 with actual exchange
> >>                                 relations, the kind Marx
> >>                                 refers to in the
> >>
> >>             first
> >>
> >>                             100
> >>
> >>                                 pages of das Kapital,
> >>                                 where he has the tailor
> >>                                 exchange a coat with
> >>
> >>                 the
> >>
> >>                                 weaver receiving two yards
> >>                                 of cloth . . . The tailor
> >>                                 exchanges
> >>
> >>                 his/her
> >>
> >>                                 cloth with others, like
> >>                                 the farmer, for 40 bushels
> >>                                 of grain . . .
> >>
> >>             In
> >>
> >>                             my
> >>
> >>                                 work, I am following them
> >>                                 around, concerned not with
> >>                                 "meaning" or
> >>
> >>                             "ideal"
> >>
> >>                                 in the abstract but as
> >>                                 realized in every THIS
> >>                                 occasion of a social
> >>                                 relation.
> >>
> >>                                 My sense is that the
> >>                                 differences you point out
> >>                                 (attempt to) lie
> >>                                 there---perhaps.
> >>
> >>                                 Michael
> >>
> >>                                 ------------------------------
> >> -----------------------------
> >>
> >>                             ---------------
> >>
> >>                                 ------
> >>                                 Wolff-Michael Roth,
> >>                                 Lansdowne Professor
> >>                                 Applied Cognitive Science
> >>                                 MacLaurin Building A567
> >>                                 University of Victoria
> >>                                 Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2
> >>                                 http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth
> >>                                 <http://web.uvic.ca/%7Emroth>
> >>                                 <http://education2.uvic.ca/
> >>
> >>             faculty/mroth/>
> >>
> >>                                 New book: *The Mathematics
> >>                                 of Mathematics
> >>                                 <https://www.sensepublishers.c
> >> om/catalogs/bookseries/new-
> >>                                 <https://www.sensepublishers.c
> >> om/catalogs/bookseries/new->
> >>
> >>                             directions-in-mat
> >>
> >>                                 hematics-and-science-education
> >> /the-mathematics-of-mathematics/>*
> >>
> >>                                 On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at
> >>                                 10:24 AM, Julian Williams <
> >>                                 julian.williams@manchester.ac.uk
> >>                                 <mailto:julian.williams@
> manchester.ac.uk
> >> >>
> >>                                 wrote:
> >>
> >>                                     Michael
> >>
> >>                                     Going back many, many
> >>                                     posts now: almost 24
> >>                                     hours worth, I think.
> >>
> >>                                     When I wrote this:
> >>
> >>                                     'Thus, I suggest, the
> >>                                     'exchange/use value' of an
> >>
> >>             utterance/dialogic
> >>
> >>                                     exchange maybe ought
> >>                                     to be examined in the
> >>                                     ideological context of
> >>
> >>                 its
> >>
> >>                                     relationship with the
> >>                                     'whole' of social
> >>                                     re/production where class
> >>
> >>                             power
> >>
> >>                                     becomes visible. I
> >>                                     don't know how to do
> >>                                     this, but the argument is
> >>
> >>                             there
> >>
> >>                                     in
> >>                                     Bourdieu: the power
> >>                                     relations between
> >>                                     people are part of the
> >>                                     capital-mediated
> >>                                     structure of relations
> >>                                     in a field (including the
> >>
> >>                             field
> >>
> >>                                     of
> >>                                     opinion/discourse),
> >>                                     and this explains the
> >>                                     forms of discourse that
> >>                                     express
> >>                                     these power
> >>                                     relationships and help
> >>                                     to hold powerful
> >>                                     positions in
> >>
> >>                             place
> >>
> >>                                     in
> >>                                     the field. In this
> >>                                     view it is not
> >>                                     possible to identify the
> >>
> >>             'value'
> >>
> >>                             of an
> >>
> >>                                     utterance or a sign
> >>                                     outside of this wider
> >>                                     analysis… and an
> >>
> >>             analysis
> >>
> >>                             of
> >>
> >>                                     the
> >>                                     particular
> >>                                     discursive/cultural
> >>                                     field within its wider
> >>                                     sociality.'
> >>
> >>                                     The sort of thing I
> >>                                     had in mind was this
> >>
> >>             'word/utterance/statement'
> >>
> >>                             of
> >>
> >>                                     yours (I care not at
> >>                                     the moment which of
> >>                                     these is chosen - in
> >>
> >>             this
> >>
> >>                                     context
> >>                                     I am not clear it
> >>                                     matters, though I
> >>                                     recognise that every
> >>                                     work was
> >>
> >>                             once
> >>
> >>                                     an
> >>                                     utterance and a speech
> >>                                     act… and that parsing
> >>                                     into words is a
> >>
> >>                             relatively
> >>
> >>                                     recent cultural artifice):
> >>
> >>                                     '…. My personal
> >>                                     inclination would be
> >>                                     to take Ricœur as more
> >>                                     authoritative
> >>                                     on the subject than
> >>                                     any or most of us'
> >>                                     (see below)
> >>
> >>                                     I think the 'value'
> >>                                     (i.e. exchange value)
> >>                                     of this statement of
> >>
> >>                 yours
> >>
> >>                             in
> >>
> >>                                     my
> >>                                     frame has to be
> >>                                     understood in the
> >>                                     context of its
> >>                                     function/workthe
> >>                                     academic field (or
> >>                                     this section of it),
> >>                                     how power is exerted here
> >>                                     through
> >>                                     reference to
> >>                                     'authorities' like
> >>                                     Ricoeur (NB not just
> >>                                     'authors'
> >>
> >>             like
> >>
> >>                             the
> >>
> >>                                     rest of us? ), whether
> >>                                     this is really useful
> >>                                     in helping the
> >>
> >>                             community to
> >>
> >>                                     progress its
> >>                                     understanding of the
> >>                                     issue for practical
> >>                                     purposes
> >>
> >>                 (e.g.
> >>
> >>                             How
> >>
> >>                                     many of the readers of
> >>                                     this post have
> >>                                     seriously read Ricoeur
> >>
> >>             enough
> >>
> >>                             to
> >>
> >>                                     get
> >>                                     the point?).
> >>
> >>                                     How our community of
> >>                                     discourse comes to be
> >>                                     structured so that
> >>
> >>             power
> >>
> >>                                     'works' like this -
> >>                                     that is a wider issue
> >>                                     - and  here it does get
> >>
> >>                             hard
> >>
> >>                                     for
> >>                                     us academics to see
> >>                                     ourselves as we
> >>                                     perhaps could or should be
> >>
> >>                 seen.
> >>
> >>                                     Michael: I hope you
> >>                                     don't take this cheeky
> >>                                     affront too
> >>
> >>             personally:
> >>
> >>                 I
> >>
> >>                                     could
> >>                                     do the same to most of
> >>                                     the posts that one
> >>                                     reads on xmca, and
> >>
> >>                 probably
> >>
> >>                                     my
> >>                                     own-  I don't mean to
> >>                                     suggest that they have
> >>                                     no use-value, and
> >>
> >>                             certainly
> >>
> >>                                     not that the
> >>                                     collective dialogue
> >>                                     has no use value. Yet
> >>                                     still… we
> >>
> >>                             should
> >>
> >>                                     recognise that there
> >>                                     is a power game in
> >>                                     this field of
> >>
> >>                             discourse/opinion,
> >>
> >>                                     if we are to
> >>                                     understand one another
> >>                                     well. It may even be
> >>                                     argued
> >>
> >>                 (with
> >>
> >>                                     some
> >>                                     merit?) that a quote
> >>                                     appealing to Marx - or
> >>                                     even Ricoeur - has
> >>
> >>             some
> >>
> >>                             use
> >>
> >>                                     as
> >>                                     well as exchange value
> >>                                     (or lets say merit) in
> >>                                     linking ideas to a
> >>
> >>                             body of
> >>
> >>                                     previous revolutionary
> >>                                     work.
> >>
> >>                                     Hugs!
> >>
> >>                                     Julian
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>                                     On 21/04/2017 16:53,
> >>                                     "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>                                     <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman
> >> .ucsd.edu>
> >>                                     on behalf
> >>
> >>             of
> >>
> >>                                     Wolff-Michael Roth"
> >>                                     <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>                                     <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman
> >> .ucsd.edu>
> >>                                     on behalf
> >>
> >>             of
> >>
> >>                                     wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com
> >>                                     <mailto:wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com
> >>
> >>                                     wrote:
> >>
> >>                                         Ricœur (1985), in
> >>                                         *Time and
> >>                                         Narrative 2*, uses
> >>                                         the following
> >>
> >>                                     distinction
> >>
> >>                                         for the purposes
> >>                                         of theorizing the
> >>                                         difference between
> >>                                         narrated
> >>
> >>                 time
> >>
> >>                             and
> >>
> >>                                         time of narration.
> >>                                         Accordingly,
> >>                                         "narrative posses"
> >>                                         "the
> >>
> >>             remarkable
> >>
> >>                                         property" "of
> >>                                         being split into
> >>                                         utterance
> >>                                         [*énociation*] and
> >>
> >>                             statement [
> >>
> >>                                         *énoncé*]."
> >>                                         To introduce this
> >>                                         distinction, it
> >>                                         suffices to recall
> >>                                         that the
> >>                                         configurating
> >>                                         act presiding
> >>                                         over emplotment is
> >>                                         a judicative act,
> >>                                         involving a "grasping
> >>
> >>                             together."
> >>
> >>                                     More
> >>
> >>                                         precisely, this
> >>                                         act belongs to the
> >>                                         family of reflective
> >>
> >>                 judgments.1
> >>
> >>                             We
> >>
> >>                                         have
> >>                                         been
> >>                                         led to say
> >>                                         therefore that to
> >>                                         narrate a story is
> >>                                         already to
> >>
> >>                 "reflect
> >>
> >>                                     upon"
> >>
> >>                                         the event
> >>                                         narrated. For this
> >>                                         reason, narrative
> >>                                         "grasping
> >>                                         together" carries
> >>
> >>                             with
> >>
> >>                                     it
> >>
> >>                                         the capacity
> >>                                         for distancing
> >>                                         itself from its
> >>                                         own production and
> >>                                         in this way
> >>
> >>                             dividing
> >>
> >>                                         itself in two. (p. 61)
> >>
> >>                                         My personal
> >>                                         inclination would
> >>                                         be to take Ricœur
> >>                                         as more
> >>
> >>                             authoritative
> >>
> >>                                     on
> >>
> >>                                         the subject than
> >>                                         any or most of us.
> >>
> >>                                         Michael
> >>
> >>
> >>                                         ------------------------------
> >> -----------------------------
> >>
> >>                                     ---------------
> >>
> >>                                         ------
> >>                                         Wolff-Michael
> >>                                         Roth, Lansdowne
> >>                                         Professor
> >>                                         Applied Cognitive
> >>                                         Science
> >>                                         MacLaurin Building
> >>                                         A567
> >>                                         University of Victoria
> >>                                         Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2
> >>                                         http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth
> >>                                         <http://web.uvic.ca/%7Emroth>
> >>                                         <http://education2.uvic.ca/
> >>
> >>                 faculty/mroth/
> >>
> >>                                         New book: *The
> >>                                         Mathematics of
> >>                                         Mathematics
> >>                                         <https://www.sensepublishers.c
> >> om/catalogs/bookseries/new-
> >>                                         <https://www.sensepublishers.c
> >> om/catalogs/bookseries/new->
> >>
> >>                                     directions-in-mat
> >>
> >>                                         hematics-and-science-education
> >> /the-mathematics-of-
> >>
> >>             mathematics/>*
> >>
> >>                                         On Thu, Apr 20,
> >>                                         2017 at 10:38 PM,
> >>                                         David Kellogg
> >>
> >>                             <dkellogg60@gmail.com
> >>                             <mailto:dkellogg60@gmail.com>>
> >>
> >>                                         wrote:
> >>
> >>                                             I think that
> >>                                             "statement" is
> >>                                             too tight, and
> >>                                             "utterance" is too
> >>
> >>                             loose.
> >>
> >>                                     A
> >>
> >>                                             statement is
> >>                                             an
> >>                                             indicative-declarative
> >>                                             wording of
> >>                                             some kind:
> >>
> >>             we
> >>
> >>                             don't
> >>
> >>                                             usually refer
> >>                                             to commands
> >>                                             (imperatives),
> >>                                             questions
> >>                                             (indicative-interrogatives),
> >>                                             or
> >>                                             exclamations
> >>                                             as "statements"
> >
> >
>



-- 
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson