With Mike (though not physically in the same place), I too experienced the recent black-out here in San Diego, and its ramifications are still unfolding in various ways. I've had several conversations with people about (as far as I can tell) the almost universal phenomenon that large numbers of people walked out of their electrically dead houses and began walking the streets, talking to one another, eating together, etc... This created pockets of interaction all across the city. Later, days after, even today (after almost two weeks), what really astounds people is how similar their memories of these pockets of interaction are: "oh, yeah, that happened to me too!", "yeah, people were on the streets, it looked like a different neighborhood". This retrospective story-telling (and sharing) is different from those interactional pockets during the earthquake. Both are shared spaces, but they are construed (come into being interactionally) very differently, but they are intimately connected, and inform not only individual experience, but collective memory. To me, this says that collective experience takes a ride on large-scale phenomena, as something like a blunt fact that everyone knows about, but remains unarticulated, remains as seed in soil. But not all seeds sprout, and even if some do sprout, not all grow to maturity. How should we characterize the levels of shared experience along this gradient? Andy's idea of a project growing out of shared experience as collective doing is closer to the mature plant end of the gradient, but I would find it odd if we couldn't have all manner of shared "xxxx" much less articulated than that and still be able to speak of them as experience. Ivan PS (This probably belongs in a separate post, but I think that in*formation and dwelling-in, and some other evocative notions that have sprouted here on xmca in recent months can be connected to "space" as it appears here, and to experience. What is had/felt/done/thought "in" what is, after all, central to our enterprise here. I've attached an article I shared with Mike, who suggested I share with you, *Alan David Rayner (2011) Space Cannot Be Cut—Why Self-Identity Naturally Includes Neighbourhood* , which appeared recently in Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science. It problematizes, in my opinion, the distinction between individual and collective experience, by way of the notion that any identity (and other things besides) "naturally include" a "neighborhood" which identity includes in itself and in which it is included at the same time. The abstract is below.) *Abstract* Psychology is not alone in its struggle with conceptualizing the dynamic relationship between space and individual or collective identity. This general epistemological issue haunts biology where it has a specific focus in evolutionary arguments. It arises because of the incompatibility between definitive logical systems of ‘contradiction or unity’, which can only apply to inert material systems, and natural evolutionary processes of cumulative energetic transformation. This incompatibility makes any attempt to apply definitive logic to evolutionary change unrealistic and paradoxical. It is important to recognise, because discrete perceptions of self and group, based on the supposition that any distinguishable identity can be completely cut free, as an ‘independent singleness’, from the space it inescapably includes and is included in, are a profound but unnecessary source of psychological, social and environmental conflict. These perceptions underlie Darwin’s definition of ‘natural selection’ as ‘the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life’. They result in precedence being given to striving for homogeneous supremacy, through the competitive suppression of others, instead of seeking sustainable, co- creative evolutionary relationship in spatially and temporally heterogeneous communities. Here, I show how ‘natural i nclusion’, a new, post-dialectic understanding of evolutionary process, becomes possible through recognising space as a limitless, indivisible, receptive (non-resistive) ‘intangible presence’ vital for movement and communication, not as empty distance between one tangible thing and another. The fluid boundary logic of natural inclusion as the co-creative, fluid dynamic transformation of all through all in receptive spatial context, allows all form to be understood as flow-form, distinctive but dynamically continuous, not singularly discrete. This simple move from regarding space and boundaries as sources of discontinuity and discrete definition to sources of continuity and dynamic distinction correspondingly enables self-identity to be understood as a dynamic inclusion of neighbourhood, through the inclusion of space throughout and beyond all natural figural forms as configurations of energy. Fully to appreciate and communicate the significance of this move, it is necessary to widen the linguistic, mathematical and imaginative remit of conventional scientific argument and explication so as to include more poetic, fluid and artistic forms of expression. On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote: > I am bewildered by this pagem Tony. > Can you recommend a page where I can read Dewey on philosophy at some > length - his work on group problem solving, learning, his critique of Hegel, > and so on. > > Andy > > Tony Whitson wrote: > >> Thanks, Andy, that is helpful. >> >> The Dewey is posted here: >> https://tw-curricuwiki.**wikispaces.com/Dewey--culture%**2C+experience<https://tw-curricuwiki.wikispaces.com/Dewey--culture%2C+experience> >> >> On Tue, 20 Sep 2011, Andy Blunden wrote: >> >> Herder, as I understand him, saw collective experience as an important >>> facet in the formation of the character of a people. I think part of the >>> problem is that "experience" has been such a contested term, Tony. Generally >>> it has been co-opted by Empiricism, which is by its nature individualist and >>> by definition the philosophy of experiene, but Dewey used the word in >>> formulating his view. But didn't he later say that he regretted using the >>> word "experience" because it led to misunderstandings? Personally, I think >>> /shared/ experience is the most powerful force in changing Zeitgeist and >>> individual mninds en masse. You have an experience, and then you find that >>> everyone else experienced the same thing and that event then becomes a >>> central focus of your collaboration with other people. What could be more >>> world-changing? >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> Tony Whitson wrote: >>> >>>> This query is prompted by a new book: >>>> >>>> Peck, Don. Pinched: How the Great Recession Has Narrowed Our Futures and >>>> What We Can Do About It. New York: Crown Pub., 2011. >>>> >>>> http://www.amazon.com/Pinched-**Great-Recession-Narrowed-** >>>> Futures/dp/0307886522<http://www.amazon.com/Pinched-Great-Recession-Narrowed-Futures/dp/0307886522> >>>> / >>>> >>>> in which the author looks more deeply into predictable ramifications of >>>> the >>>> current economic situation than I have seen in other recent work. >>>> >>>> >>>> Based on historical, sociological, and other literatures and modes of >>>> research, the author argues that what we're dealing with now is not just >>>> a >>>> wave in a recurring cycle. He predicts lasting changes that he expects >>>> to >>>> deeply impact different generational cohorts for decades to come. >>>> >>>> >>>> His argument is plausible, at least, to me. But it prompts me to wonder >>>> about experience that is really collective experience, as opposed to >>>> individual experience. >>>> >>>> >>>> Exposing my ignorance, I realize that I can't think of literature on the >>>> nature and structure of collective experience. It seems like there must >>>> be a >>>> lot; but I can't think of it. It also seems like xmca is a likely place >>>> to >>>> find people who would be interested, and would know about such >>>> literature >>>> (although it's not on-topic in the current threads). >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm thinking of my first earthquake experience last month as an example >>>> of >>>> an individual experience. It was totally unlike anything I'd ever >>>> experienced before, and it took me a few seconds to even recognize that >>>> an >>>> earthquake is what was happening (we don't have those in Delaware). I >>>> was at >>>> my desk, at home, by myself when it happened. >>>> Of course, the experience was mediated after the fact from my >>>> sociocultural >>>> awareness of earthquakes. Still, I think it was an individual experience >>>> in >>>> the moment, compared with the collective experience that Don Peck is >>>> writing >>>> about -- an experience of events and developments over time, in which >>>> the >>>> experience of others participates, throughout, in the experience of any >>>> one. >>>> >>>> >>>> I am thinking that there might be something else that could be called >>>> "shared experience," intermediate between individual and collective >>>> experience. >>>> >>>> >>>> Does this make any sense? Is this question of interest to anyone? Or am >>>> I >>>> naďvely wondering about things that have been well developed in the >>>> >>>> literature? >>>> >>>> >>>> I would be interested if anyone has ideas or references to share on >>>> this. >>>> >>>> ______________________________**____________ >>>> _____ >>>> xmca mailing list >>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu >>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> ------------------------------**------------------------------** >>> ------------ >>> *Andy Blunden* >>> Joint Editor MCA: http://www.informaworld.com/** >>> smpp/title~db=all~content=**g932564744<http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=g932564744> >>> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857<http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857> >>> >>> ______________________________**____________ >>> _____ >>> xmca mailing list >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca> >>> >>> >> Tony Whitson >> UD School of Education >> NEWARK DE 19716 >> >> twhitson@udel.edu >> ______________________________**_ >> >> "those who fail to reread >> are obliged to read the same story everywhere" >> -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970) >> > > -- > ------------------------------**------------------------------** > ------------ > *Andy Blunden* > Joint Editor MCA: http://www.informaworld.com/**smpp/title~db=all~content= > **g932564744<http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=g932564744> > Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857<http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857> > > ______________________________**____________ > _____ > xmca mailing list > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca> >
Attachment:
Alan David Rayner (2011) Space Cannot Be Cut—Why Self-Identity Naturally Includes Neighbourhood.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca