Re: VS: [xmca] Re: Knotworking (ex: Double stimulation?)

[Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>]

Andy,

This excerpt was very helpful, explicitly contrasting systems, structures,
institutions, EMERGING FROM projects projecting living concepts within the
world. [that is how I translated your concept. Not a reversible process,
living concepts are prior to systems and structures.
Where do you situate the *interpretive* and *reflexive* moment within
living concepts as projects? [interpretive social science]

larry



On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

> And as Mike sketched a few days ago, what an amazing little country
> Finland is!!
>
> The point is that in order to understand an object (such as the unique
> nature of Finland, or the upsurge in Brazil) - complex, dynamic entities -
> we need *units* which are themselves processes of development. For example,
> I don't believe we can understand a nation state as a collection of *social
> groups* (eg ethnic, or economic, etc.), but rather as a process made up of
> many other distinct processes of development, i.e., projects, which
> interact with one another.
>
> Formally speaking, the "systems of activity" which Yrjo introduced are
> indeed processes of development; but "project" is much more explicitly so.
> Further, we individuals apprehend these units (be they "systems of
> activity" or "projects") as *concepts*, and the rules, norms, community,
> division of labour, etc. etc., *flow from the concept* as does the
> *ever-changing conception of the *object*. If objects (and community,
> norms, etc.), pre-exist an activity, then we don't have Activity Theory at
> all, we have some variety of structuralism of functionalism.
>
> So it is important to begin from the project, each of which is a
> particular instance of a concept, and all the elements (norms, tools, etc.)
> of the project flow from its concept and the conditions in which it is
> developing.
>
> So for example, I don't think it is appropriate to conceive the social
> movements, voluntary associations, protests, political conflicts and
> alliances of 20th century Finland as "systems" or "institutions." They are
> projects, projects which constructed modern Finland, and which indeed, one
> day, become "systems", but never irreversibly. The institutions which are
> the products of social movements, protests, and so on (projects) are never
> irreversibly reified as "fields" or "figured worlds" or "pratico-inerts" or
> "structures" or any of the other renderings of the social fabric as
> composed of dead and lacking in teleological content.
>
> Andy
>
>
> Rauno Huttunen wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Similar things happened in Finland too. See article by professor Martti
>> Siisiäinen: Social Movements, Voluntary Associations and Cycles of Protest
>> in Finland 1905-91 (Scandinavian Political Studies, Bind 15, 1992).
>>
>> https://tidsskrift.dk/index.**php/scandinavian_political_**
>> studies/article/view/13149/**25059<https://tidsskrift.dk/index.php/scandinavian_political_studies/article/view/13149/25059>
>>
>> Rauno
>>
>> ______________________________**__________
>> Lähettäjä: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>> k&#228;ytt&#228;j&#228;n Andy Blunden [ablunden@mira.net] puolesta
>> Lähetetty: 26. kesäkuuta 2013 3:30
>> Kopio: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> Aihe: Re: [xmca] Re: Knotworking (ex: Double stimulation?)
>>
>> But to make a distinction is not necessarily to set up a dichotomy.
>>
>> In Australian social history the appearance of voluntary associations n
>> the 19th century (mostly trade union-type organisations, but also sports
>> and recreation, mutual-aid of various kinds, and later political parties
>> and groups) was a significant development, which meant people regularly
>> travelling long distances to stitch together the fabric of the emerging
>> nation. In the US, the parallel role was played, I believe, to a great
>> extent, also by Protestant sects, who pioneered the building of new
>> bonds of sociability and trust across great distances.
>>
>> These New World projects constructed a new kind of civil society and the
>> basis for modernity. According to Hegel for example, modernity is
>> characterised by the eclipse of family as the chief bond and political
>> force in a state, by voluntary associations, such as professional
>> associations or regional community organisations, where people of
>> differing traditions construct new modern conditions of collaboration.
>> But of course, the family and the state both remain in place!
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> Greg Thompson wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Yes, Andy, I think the anthropological notion of kinship captures your
>>> point that not all biological relatives are "kin". Anthropologist
>>> David Schneider, for example, points out how kinship is really just
>>> the Aristotelian notion of "identity", and that "kinship" is
>>> fundamentally a matter of sameness of substance. Thus, political and
>>> religious affiliations are, in his view, systems of kinship.
>>>
>>> Seems like the same would be true of so-called "voluntary association"
>>> (scare quotes because of skepticism of notions of voluntary and the
>>> assumptions it makes about us as subjects). Any voluntary association
>>> worth its salt will surely have this sense of shared substance (and
>>> with regard to the making of this shared substance, Durkheim is
>>> essential - but that's a different story for a different time!). And
>>> don't most of these organizations have some sense of kinship built
>>> into their relational terms, whether "brother" or "brotherhood" or
>>> "family" or whatever?
>>>
>>> -greg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
>>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Yes, there is no doubt that the commitment many people have to
>>>     continuing the work of their parents and even ancestors, and their
>>>     investment in their children, evidences a project, an archetypal
>>>     project in fact. "Voluntary associations" are historically a
>>>     relatively recent invention, prior to which kinship was possibly
>>>     the most significant project in human life. Of course, it is not
>>>     always the case that a kinship relation always indicates the
>>>     relevance of the concept of "project" - I have cousins whom I have
>>>     never met and to whom I have no commitment whatsoever.
>>>
>>>     Andy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**____________
>> _____
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
> ------------
>
> *Andy Blunden*
> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> http://marxists.academia.edu/**AndyBlunden<http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden>
>
>
> ______________________________**____________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca