Dear Larry, I encountered Butler's discussion of 'consciouness creating it's relation to the world through transformative action' of Kojeve on p 70 of my CU Press paperback edition seems to examine what might be at stake in not taking an embodied position in 'place' - that we also 'continue 'in nature. Which is where Rayner's ontology rests (although he isn't engaging with these ideas as framed here). Stetsenko seems to accept that these are simulatneous in the article you suggested some time ago. An aside here is that very different appropriations of 'rhizome' are made in CHAT and Tamboukou - who were influenced by Deleuze & G 1988. the principles of organisation of rhizomes guides both - however Tamboukou is not doing developmental research. In her ethnography she then 'switches' from the principles of living as a rhizome - to using it as a mapping tool for her data - which is not a developmental engagement. Rayner's history includes his presidency of the British Mycological Society, and he is drawing from principles of how relational rhizome/fungii organisation is in neighbourhood , circumspection and focus of energetic relation- some of which comes through from D&G 1988 work. Yet a rhizomatic network, even though it can be constituted of many individual spore growths joining , is forming unity. Whereas, as you emphasise, in 'golden age' is not cultural unity, and there is 'alterity' , but how can such a dynamic be understood? I think here the wayfaring , or 'nomadic thinking' is underexplored. I recall some reading of what travellers 'bring', and how enrichments arise in places of reciprocal hospitality. Perhaps Al -Andalus expressed this appreciation that enabled development without the displacement of travelling? I am not sure how 'radical' Levinas is, as I haven't reached an understanding. However alterity seems very important. I pass a fleeting meeting with Borgerson in the file attached. if I 'cherry pick' I wonder about the description of a transition from thinking in complexes to thinking in concepts p123-124 T&L Kozulin and 'concept-for-others' precedes 'concept-for-self- What this might mean I relate to Zuckerman's observations about cooperation where no member has 'expertise' yet each progesses through joint work. (e.g p194 V Educ Theory in Cultural context,2003). There is 'alterity' in social relations but what does societal awareness and not only 'sociality' in our projects entail. Projects , and activities don't necessarily make 'unity' in practices perhaps - would this still be consistent with 'ideal' or is subjective 'transcendence' necessary to continue 'in nature' and in form ideal? I look forward to Reading Zinchenko - as Mike suggested, and also I'm interested to ground a notion of situated agency in my study at present so thanks for your orientation to Donna Orange. I shall probably be engaged for a while in this, Too much for one message! Christine
Attachment:
070308_borgerson.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Attachment:
borgerson.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca