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

Re: [xmca] Arne Raeithel's "genealogy"

Both Arne's and mine are listed on http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/index.html and both are in that directory. I too would be interested in seeing some other versions. Something might emerge out of the crowd.

It is interesting isn't that it is a quite small number of ... what do you say? ... millieux? events? movements? which produced the main ideas, via a whole mass of individual writers.


mike cole wrote:
I think your pictured genealogy is interesting, Andy. I thought Arne's was too, and I a sure others can make interesting modifications. If anyone could do this in three D it could get really fascinating.

Part of what makes for the partiality of any such attempt is the position of the creator. Arne was a radical cultural historical cognitive scientist of the
70's-90's (roughly), an importatant odd hybrid and unusually nice guy.
Maturana, who is on his list, with Varela, were central figures on bringing
dynamic systems into the discussion but you do not know about him just
as many of us do not know some of the figures you name, and the connections such as Dilthey-Wundt or Mead-Dilthey-American pragmatism are poorly known altogether, but fascinating (to me!) in their implications.

And, of course, the historical events that various of us might highlight as
most relevant are going to vary as well.

Thanks for the new tool to think with. I'll try to get Arne's genealogy put
up where yours is and perhaps others will contribute from their perspectives.

On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:

    Well, here's my shot at it:
    I have tried to deal with your very valid point, Martin, that it is
    more the milieux than individuals, but I have also just omitted a
    billion possible arrows so it is readable. It needs more than one
    person to do this.

    Martin Packer wrote:

        My question about the map is what the links represent. After
        all, one scientist or philosopher may accept the ideas or
        another, or react against them, or modify them, or misunderstand
        them. Seems to me each of these is a different link. Also, a
        family tree indicates two parents for every progeny, where
        Arne's genealogy seemingly shows spontaneous generation - one
        figure alone can produce another. And wouldn't we want to have a
        way to map the milieus within which people were working? Perhaps
        something along the lines of the social fields that Bourdieu was
        fond of sketching, but with an added historical dimension.


        On Nov 4, 2009, at 1:44 AM, Andy Blunden wrote:

            To tell the truth Louise, there are a couple of names I
            don't know and half a dozen I know so little about I don't
            know why they're included ... or not. Two of the three
            "outcomes" are people who think humans are a type of
            computer, so I am not surpised that this genealogy is odd to
            me. But there is sooooo much out there. So much to read. :(

            Up till a few weeks ago I thought that starting with
            Descartes was not justified, but I take that back now. But
            somehow, Rene's nemesis, Aristotle, needs to be included as

            I don't know anything about Vico, but I find Locke, Berkeley
            and Leibniz to be rather peripheral to *our* story.

            Kant certainly deserves an important place, but I think his
            nemesis, Goethe, may be more important for us.

            Fichte is actually the inventor of Activity as a
            philosophical concept (I just learnt that Hegel asked to be
            buried next to Fichte; like Goethe, very under recognized in
            the Anglophone world).

            Hegel is the inventor of Cultural Psychology, so agreed there.

            I think Stirner and Mach are total diversions from our
            tradition. But maybe someone can explain to me their role.

            Wundt and Dilthey are important, though I don't know them well.

            Feuerbach is a bit of a footnote, but if you're going to
            have Feuerbach, you've gotta have Moses Hess, author of
            "Philosophy of the Deed", and inspiration for "Theses on
            Feuerbach". Of course if you think Frege, Russell and Turing
            are important to the genealogy of CHAT, then you wouldn't
            want Hess.

            MARX, obviously, in CAPS.

            And I would have lines from a whole bunch of people going to
            Dewey, as well as Peirce and Mead, but even though Peirce
            was the elder, I don't think you can give him such priority.
            Dewey surely was the leader. Arguable.

            And where are the Gestaltists? Again, not for computer
            cognition, but there needs to be lines between Goethe and
            Kant and then to von Ehrenfels, and on to Koehler and Co.

            Russian linguists like Potebnya, but I don't know where they
            came from.

            And these threads are all tied together with LS Vygotsky, yes?

            Freud has to be mentioned (I forget his sources), with
            arrows to Luria. And after Vygotsky and Luria you have ANL
            and thus to present day people,

            I guess, you can't leave out Piaget, and I don't know
            Piaget's sources.

            I know some people rate Merleau-Ponty, but if you're going
            to give Merleau-Pony a seat, you have to put in Lukacs and
            Horkheimer. I guess Habermas for discourse ethics, etc.

            I have no idea why Husserl and Heidegger get a mention. I my
            humble opinion, as clever as they might be, their impact on
            Activity Theory has only been negative.

            I have no idea why Bergson is mentioned: was he a source for
            Piaget? Don't know why Nietzsche is there. Interesting guy,
            but so are many others. Why von Uexhill?

            I agree that Wittgenstein rates a mention, though I don't
            know how much of a source he has been for us. He is some
            kind of version of Activity Theory.

            Frege, Russell and Turing are nothing to do with CHAT. What
            about anthropologists??

            Never heard of Maturana.

            That's my reaction,


            Louise Hawkins wrote:

                I remember seeing this diagram a number of years ago,
                and I found it useful as a big picture diagram to get my
                head around the significant theorist.
                Louise Hawkins
                Lecturer - School of Management & Information Systems
                Faculty Business & Informatics
                Building 19/Room 3.38
                Rockhampton Campus
                Ph: +617 4923 2768
                Fax: +617 4930 9729
                 -----Original Message-----
                From: Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net
                <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>] Sent: Wednesday, 4 November
                2009 01:05 PM
                To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
                Subject: [xmca] Arne Raeithel's "genealogy"
                I never found this map very useful to be honest.
                mike cole wrote:

                    Have you found Arne Raeithel's "genealogy" of
                    cultural-historical, activity theory thinkers from
                    several years back. I am sure it is somewhere at
                    lchc.ucsd.edu <http://lchc.ucsd.edu>
                    <http://lchc.ucsd.edu>. Perhaps you (and Andy,
                    and.....) could update it with
                    more detail. Hegel generated so much that has been
                    "laundered" by subsequent "original" thinkers its
                    totally amazing, and ditto Mead (whose writings i
                    know far better, although very inadequately).

                xmca mailing list
                xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
                xmca mailing list
                xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>

-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
            Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
            Ilyenkov $20 ea

            xmca mailing list
            xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>

-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
    Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
    Ilyenkov $20 ea

    xmca mailing list
    xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>

Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov, Ilyenkov $20 ea

xmca mailing list