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

Re: [xmca] CHAT: Interdisciplinary or maybe TRANS-disciplinary?

It seemed to me that rather than getting scholars from other disciplines "on board", what is necessary is our own boarding party. We need to enter the discourse in other disciplines, e.g., in their journals and at their conferences, and critique their work, and draw out the need for CHAT ideas from that critique.

I have tried. I am from outside CHAT anyway, so I should be able to. But so far I have failed. But I labour under other disadvantages as I am outside academia altogether and getting heard inside CHAT (if it weren't for Mike/xmca) is hard enough let alone at Critical Theory or Hegel Society conferences, etc.

But I think some of us who do have academic skills, if people were to take a break and submit papers critiquing (for example) social theorists, in their own language in their own journals, then CHAT ideas would be taken seriously.


Bruce Robinson wrote:
I think it is pretty widely stated that cultural historical activity theory
or socio-cultural historical practice theory or ..........
is what is ordinarily conceived of as an inter-disciplinary undertaking
spans at least social sciences and humanities, with
some arts and evolutionary biology thrown in from time to time (and even,
gulp, some math).

Don't forget information systems which has a reasonable corpus of CHAT work.
Or perhaps more generally socio-techn[olog]ical studies should also be

Andy has been using the term interdisciplinary in trying to get us to
of projects as a basic unit of analysis while some
resist the idea of *A SINGLE* unit of analysis that spans all concerns of
this ryzhomic enterprise.

And despite the talk of interdisciplinarity, we seem to be pretty heavily
centered in psychology and education, with only
some attention to work.
Might we need to think seriously about a TRANS-discipline where
across levels of time and syncrhonic variation
are included? Or must we always be piecemeal, able to cope with 2-3
dimensions/aspects of our problematic, but unable
to move to the integrative level that our own theories tell us we need?

On a transdiscipline: Definitely. This integration is implicit in the fundamental conceptions of CHAT IMHO.

Don't forget space either. It seems to have been rather under-theorised in CHAT from what I can see and there seem to be some interesting possible crossovers. Plus a group of radical geographers who might be interested.

Bruce R

Last thought/question of the evening.
xmca mailing list


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.8/2086 - Release Date: 04/29/09

xmca mailing list

Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy/
Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden:
From Erythrós Press and Media <http://www.erythrospress.com/>.

xmca mailing list