Re: foucault on slavery and politics --Psych/physical tools?

From: Peg Griffin (
Date: Wed Mar 23 2005 - 07:30:47 PST

And is "mutual appropriation" what makes it both (process and residual)? We
appropriate the newborn to further the culture ...
Is it like waves and particles -- not so much an either/or as a
frame/perspective shift?
The agent of that appropriation (also appearing as the residual of history)
is a body politic so we are back to the chains, material and psychic.
It all brings me back to Luria's yoked systems that can interrupt each other
creating the condition for movement.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Cole" <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 6:50 AM
Subject: Re: foucault on slavery and politics --Psych/physical tools?

> Hi Mary-- I somehow missed your note to Jay.
> Yes,culutre as historical process has the implications needed. And I
> like it too.
> But I think an and/both approach to the issue is preferable to an
> either/or
> --- process or residual of history as encountered by the child at
> birth. That is,
> viewed synchronically, culture appears as an already-there set of
> structured
> meansing, practices, etc that the newborn must appropriate for
> acceptance into the group (the acquisition of appropriate (d)
> knowledge a la Goodenough. And
> even duirng a life time, at least in times and places of relatively slow
> socio-
> ecological change, it may appear pretty static (an illusion, change is
> constant,
> but perhaps not "paradigm shifting" change). Viewed in the loinger
> term, there is
> no avoiding the culture as process view. In my usages, a concentric
> circles (your onion) versus weaving together point of view).
> The relation of this discussion to contextualist world views is, I
> think, clear, but if not, worth more discussion for sure.
> mike
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:42:02 +0200, Mary van der Riet
> <> wrote:
>> In response to Jay's comment on 'ossification' and culture, when one
>> thinks of culture as a dialectical process, would that not counter any
>> idea of stagnation/ossification? If cultural frames 'afford' us
>> particular opportunities/concepts, do not we in turn utilise, interact
>> with and form culture - almost then 'affording' culture the opportunity
>> of becoming something different?
>> I always find Clifford Geertz's articulation of the concept of culture
>> useful. He draws a distinction between a stratigraphic approach (culture
>> as a layer, for example on an onion, that can and must be removed), and
>> a more synthetic understanding of the relationship between culture and
>> the individual: culture as a process. This moves away from culture as a
>> variable - which is how much psychological research is conducted.
>> Mary
>> Mary van der Riet; School of Psychology; University of KwaZulu-Natal
>> Private Bag X01, Scottsville, 3209
>> email:
>> tel: 033 260 6163; fax: 033 2605809
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Please find our disclaimer at
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> <<<<gwavasig>>>>

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 01 2005 - 01:00:06 PST