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

Re: [xmca] Jones on Learning under capitalism



Certainly larry, there is a danger of the action of market relations on other forms of collaboration, such as families, eroding them. Prenuptial agreements and the increasing recourse to the service industries and technology for purposes formerly belonging to the family, are signs of this happening (some good some not). But the development of the market relation itself, and its penetration into other relations are two different things, and need to be theorised separately.

Andy

Larry Purss wrote:
Andy,  you wrote
And nor could capitalism operate for a day without the production of healthy, sane workers by means of the loving care of collaborative working classs families. I think Activity Theory should pay attention to the systematic investigation of these different modes of collaboration. Altogether we need a more differentiated approach. The way Zygmunt is writing about the loving care of healthy sane working families, I wonder if there is a danger of even this level of intimacy and collaboration unravelling. Zygmunt is suggesting that the valuing of "aesthetic interests" as basic points of reference and orientation [attributes such as excitement, satisfaction or pleasure] is devaluing moral commitments that support continuous shared engagements. He refers to this unravelling as the loss of the public sphere or in my terms a search for a "new commons" [page 34 & 35] Andy, I wonder if we as a culture(s) can continue to nurture and sustain "the loving care of collaborative working families" within the fragmentary disruptive social arrangements that Zygmunt is charting in his concept of liquid modernity. He is suggesting the newer forms of identity reforming within these fluid arrangements are of necessity valuing aesthetic interests because we have lost our basic trust in the more durable valuing of a shared commons. Zygmunt's writings, because they are explicitly referencing and developing "moral values" that attempt to construct "lasting networks of mutual duties and obligations" is helping me to understand the depth of the struggle that is required. His perspective requires our imaginations to envision alternatives that are not fragmentary and PROVISIONAL. Larry

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:

    Larry, though there is a basis for the conception of "personality
    types" and they have some role to play in the description of the
    social changes taking place, I don't think they are the main
    analytical tool. I can see two ways to go here. (1) the approach
    of Regulation Theory, which points out that while capitalism is a
    globally hegemonic mode of production, every country and period
    solves a number of problems in different ways in respect to each
    of a number of functional aspects of social life, e.g., the wages
    system, the social welfare system, the state/political system, the
    market system, the education system, and so on. In general, these
    are not indifferent in their ramifications and need to be
    theorised separately, and (2) the theorisation by means of
    Activity Theory of the finite range of different relations. In my
    opinion these relations can be grouped into purchase-and-sale,
    command-and-obey and critical cooperation (or collaboration
    properly so-called). No capitalist firm can operate, for example,
    without using the ancient system of hierarchical direction. And
    nor could capitalism operate for a day without the production of
    healthy, sane workers by means of the loving care of collaborative
    working classs families. I think Activity Theory should pay
    attention to the systematic investigation of these different modes
    of collaboration. Altogether we need a more differentiated approach.

    Andy


    Larry Purss wrote:

        Andy, if Zygmunt's analysis is accurate, then gathering
        pessimism is a
        reasonable response to our current arrangements where more and
        more relationships are provisional as an adaptation to
        capitalist rule. How
        do we move beyond these liquid arrangements to form
        personality "types"
        which are expressive of yearnings for ONGOING connection and
        shared
        purpose.  The answer cannot be merely epistemological or merely
        practical/functional but MUST engage with alternative social
        ETHICS which
        constitute new personality "types".


    __________________________________________
    _____
    xmca mailing list
    xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
    http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca



--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857

__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca