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

[Xmca-l] Re: xmca new discussion started SOCIOLOGY | PSYCHOLOGY



Er. "not do any research on the dynamics of the institutions of formal education (for example) by by" should be "do research on the dynamics of the institutions of formal education (for example) by"

Sorry,
Andy

------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden
http://home.mira.net/~andy
http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
On 10/06/2017 12:03 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
Alfredo, in every science there are specialisms which are necessarily pursued in relatively independent research communities, despite being part of the same science. What makes all these specialisms parts of the one science is the use of concepts which are shared across the whole science and are necessarily connected in the constitution of the science. CHAT is such a science; its basic concepts such as artefact-mediated actions and activities are basic to both psychology and social theory as we approach it. Therefore the educational psychologist may *not* do *any *research on the dynamics of the institutions of formal education (for example) by *by *dint of the fact "activity" is a shared concept, discoveries from one research field can enter the research in the other, and from time to time problems in educational psychology will find their solution in the social theory of formal educational institutions, and vice versa.

Andy

------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden
http://home.mira.net/~andy
http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
On 10/06/2017 5:11 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote:
I had to make a pause in my contributing to the discussion, as we (my family) are these days relocating from Victoria to Europe (in Spain at the moment). But I have kept wondering (and wandering) around the topic that came up in Yasuko Kawatoko's article concerning emotion and infrastructure, and then about ANT and CHAT. And so I was thinking that the question relates to that of the connection between sociology and psychology, does not it? For is there the possibility of a psychology without a sociology in either ANT or CHAT?

To travel from Victoria to Alicante, we (2 adults and a 7-year and a 2-year) had to take a drive (a friend drove us) from (no longer) home to the airport, then, after a number of procedures at the airport, got into a plain to fly Victoria - Calgary; then Calgary - Amsterdam; then Amsterdam - Madrid, then a taxi that would drive us to a high-speed train to Alicante. Then a (family) drive from Alicante to a small town in the province of Valencia. That's an infrastructure. And that's a lot of affect generated. I could not help but to think on the relation between infrastructure and emotion all the way...

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: 02 June 2017 07:05
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: xmca new discussion started

Michael, to pick up this thread:
“ The important part of the quotation is this: "*the methods* in and through which members concertedly produce and assemble," and these include making the very production and assembly available to each other.

In particular the phrase:

“in and through which” the methods are assembled [arranged].

Here is the way that Kenneth Liberman makes a similar observation within a note # 1

1 The phrase ‘‘in and as of’’ intends to retain the actual state of affairs of a social practice. Instead of conceiving of a metaphysical object, ‘‘science,’’ which ‘‘has’’ certain practices, a science consists of its practices. It does not exist apart from them; in fact, the task of any inquiry into the lebenswelt origins of sciences takes its departure from this recognition. A science is nothing more than, and nothing less than, the activities of its practitioners. The phrase promises to retain the important insight, which is consistent with Husserl’s own phenomenological discoveries, that a science does not merely exist in its practices, it exists as its practices. The perspective is vital to an anti-essentialist inquiry, and the phrase is employed frequently in ethnomethodology (cf. Garfinkel, 2002, p. 92, 99, 138, 207, 211, 246, 247; Garfinkel and Wieder, 1992, p. 175).

So the two  phrases
“in and through which” & “in and as of” are indicating a way of making visible a work or a method or a discipline AS practices.

For further elaboration here reproduced a full page of the article written by Kenneth Liberman where note #1 is generated: This page may be taking us off topic or it may be relevant?? This page is bringing in another approach exploring the origins of ethno “methods”.

“ While Husserl provided the direction for our ethnomethodological investigations, the lived work of various sciences––in their coherent, work-site specific organizational Things-in-distinctive-details, case by case for the particular sciences––are obscured by Husserl’s use of formal generalities in both The Gottingen Lectures and The Crisis. Regrettably, and as a certainty, both of Husserl’s treatises lose the phenomenon they were written carefully to describe. That is, they lose the phenomenon of the actual work-sites of any science. And there they also lose the instructed actions of the scientists, i.e. their actual world-generating collaborations. They lose the phenomenon by losing just-how their instructed actions are administered to reveal for the scientists their work, as well as the objects they are studying. In Husserl’s program, the lebenswelt origins, being only formally exhibited by the lectures, do not actually describe any lebenswelt practices. They do not exhibit lebenswelt practices with lived-in-the-course instructed actions. They merely allude to lebenswelt practices. The real achievement of Husserl’s program, then, is that the actual lived work of sciences are alluded to as lived practices. And that is no small achievement. The Gottingen Lectures and The Crisis assert the promises of Husserl’s monumental program. Their incongruous anomaly is that their promise was neither noticed nor recognized by bench practitioners of any science. The program of The Crisis was never taken up by scientists, nor was it welcomed as filling a ‘‘gap’’ in the coherence of a particular science, in and as of its discovered topics and practices.1 Nevertheless, despite the fact that scientists rarely welcomed Husserl’s inquiries, in epistemological philosophy the program remains venerated as Husserl’s achievement. Yet even there Husserl’s program has not been taken up in a radical way, as the familiar haecceities2 o f an actual science. It has only been used to illustrate cases for ep istemological arguments about the sciences. Hence, the task of taking up Husserl’s program seriously remains. This is not to say that no ground has been gained. Very little in The Gottingen Lectures redescribes the lived work of any actual science. On the contrary, the lectures forcefully point to the absence of haecceities in any and every particular science. These absent details can involve the shop talk, local gestural organization, the local endogenous practices of social order production and accountability, and their coherent substantive material, which might include board notes, personal notebooks, diaries, diagrams, scribblings, books, ....”

The theme here is the shift from a theory being “formally exhibited” within disciplinary methods to re-mark what was previously formally exhibited to become a method of describing lebenswelt practices. [ethno practices].








Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Wolff-Michael Roth
Sent: June 1, 2017 5:48 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: xmca new discussion started

Thanks Martin,

I do not view what I am saying--though it is differently said---from what you quote. The important part of the quotation is this: "*the methods* in and through which members concertedly produce and assemble," and these include making the very production and assembly available to each other. In all of this, some things are unquestioned, and Garfinkel wrote considerably
on the invisible background assumption . . .

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://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/>

New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics
<https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/new-directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the-mathematics-of-mathematics/>*

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
wrote:

Hi Wolff-Michael,

I agree with most of what you’ve written, but not the suggestion that EM starts from the assumption that people (simply) make visible order that has its origins somewhere else. I’ll quote from an encyclopedia article by Doug
Maynard and Teddy Kardash:


Ethnomethodology is an area in sociology originating in the work of Harold Garfinkel. It represents an effort to study the methods in and through which members concertedly produce and assemble the features of everyday life in any actual, concrete, and not hypothetical or theoretically depicted setting…. Members of society achieve this intelligible organization through actual, coordinated, concerted, procedural behaviors
or methods and practices.

  Martin

On Jun 1, 2017, at 7:27 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth <
wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com<mailto:wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com>> wrote:

Martin,
I would have thought that ethno*methodology* is the study of the methods, the work, people use to make social orders visible. In this, it is very different from all other research, qualitative and quantitative. Garfinkel describes it as *incommensurably different *from, among others, interpretive studies of social life. He distinguishes EM from formal analytic studies, all those that have to specify methods because these methods are different from the methods people use in everyday life. EM does not dispute the results of other research; its interests are completely
elsewhere.
Practically, EM is interested in change if it is what people do; it is not interested in the change but how people do make change and the required
work visible to each other.
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://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/>

New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics
<https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/new-
directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the-
mathematics-of-mathematics/>*

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no
<mailto:a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>>
wrote:

Larry, I also was thinking that visibility, in other EM/CA studies also as
instructability, speaks to change. A
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu<mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ mailman.ucsd.edu> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu<mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
mailman.ucsd.edu>>
on behalf of Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com<mailto:lpscholar2@gmail.com
Sent: 02 June 2017 01:44
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: xmca new discussion started

Martin,
This sentence,
“Creating and sustaining order always requires change”
And therefore makes visible change as the norm
Seems to be pregnant with an evocative enacting of possibility for novel
kinds of social fabric[continuing with the weaving theme]

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Alfredo Jornet Gil
Sent: June 1, 2017 4:18 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: xmca new discussion started

Yes, I agree with what you say. I guess I used the word change where I
meant development. So I am going to change my question:

What do and could do researchers concerned with development (social,
personal) with EM.

You recently shared with us a beautiful book on the topic of development.
How does EM feature in it?
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu<mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ mailman.ucsd.edu> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu<mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
mailman.ucsd.edu>>
on behalf of Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co<mailto:
mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>>
Sent: 02 June 2017 00:40
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: xmca new discussion started

Hi Alfredo,

I’ve always thought that EM deals very well with change, because it does not treat stasis as the norm. EM is the study of the methods that people (actants) employ to create and sustain order, various kinds of order.
Creating and sustaining order always requires change.

Martin



On Jun 1, 2017, at 5:24 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no
<mailto:a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
<mailto:a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>> wrote:

I personally find ethnomethodology EM fascinating and a powerful approach to stick the realities of social life; but I always wondered what does EM
do with questions of change.