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

[Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan thatCould Fix It | WIRED

I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to
have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both
local and global seems unlikely to suffice.

I have not had time to read Peter's paper, but will get to it.

I now have copies of the Zuckerman for those that wish a copy.

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:50 AM, <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:

> Peter, Mike,
> Thanks for engaging with this topic that can seem to be herding cats
> (earlier metaphor).
> I want to raise up a specific question Mike asks:
> Do we come up with (indexes) of identities with  standing??.
> Indexes as signs pointing or gesturing towards ...
> What if we don’t (come up with) indexes.
> What if we singularly and co-generatively ARE indexes  or signs as human
> beings  expressing our humanity, pointing towards worlds of (significance)
> within which our existence occurs (unfolds). My being/becoming as movement,
> inclination, leaning into, indicating the reality of worlds of significance
> and our response ability to see beyond our individual existence to embrace
> and sustain and yes -resume- our mutual engagement nurturing worlds of
> significance.
> It is not a matter of drawing up a list of indexes, but of living out and
> being/becoming indexical beings oriented towards worlds of significance.
> Critique yes, but derived from what is already given.
> We stand not only between past and future, but equally between tradition
> and oblivion. (Foulcault).
> The angel of oblivion that must be answered by our existence as sign or
> index.
> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> From: Peter Smagorinsky
> Sent: November 28, 2016 3:43 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan
> thatCould Fix It | WIRED
> Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons
> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan
> that Could Fix It | WIRED
> That link to your site doesn't work, Peter.
> Rob
> On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote:
> > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can
> agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's
> tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples
> that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that
> have no "solid" form.
> >
> > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical
> > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's
> > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248.
> > Available at
> > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf
> >
> > abstract
> > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on
> > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's
> > account of concept development, including his distinction between
> > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of
> > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and
> > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from
> > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines
> > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural
> > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section
> outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development,
> including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension
> of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a
> higher mental function.
> > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's
> > “twisting path” and complicates it by questioning the extent to which
> > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead
> > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to
> > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented
> > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by
> attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural–historical
> contexts.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole
> > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan
> > that Could Fix It | WIRED
> >
> > I just got to this message, Larry.
> > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it
> is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of
> neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can
> be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It
> is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future
> generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and
> publications. For example:
> >
> > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on
> > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren’t just talking
> > past each other. “Often, in behavioral science, people talk about
> > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,” says Riley. Or
> > the opposite
> > happens: Chemists don’t squabble about what oxygen is, but if
> > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like “trust,”
> > says Colin Camerer <http://people.hss.caltech.edu/~camerer/index.htm>,
> > an economist at Caltech, they’ll spend the first two days disagreeing
> > about what the word actually means.*
> >
> > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and
> > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with
> > nowadays. (If you’re trying to compare variables in two datasets both
> > named “resilience,” how do you know they’re really the same thing?) To
> > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on
> > rigorously defined terms. “We need to figure out what we mean when we
> > say ‘depression,’ and how to define it—either by using the same
> > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,” Riley says.*
> >
> > ​The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate
> with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory
> ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary
> idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about
> coding, which David has introduced into the conversation.
> >
> > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that
> serves as the content of xmca.
> > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?.
> >
> > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the
> question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is
> professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and
> that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the
> article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some
> discussion.
> >
> > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers
> > must articulate new ways of​ making selves intelligible in the
> > contexts of our lives, including producing “identities-with-standing”​
> > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index
> > a way-of-being that brings​ special pride and a sense of self-worth
> > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and*
> >
> > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity,
> > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *​ * *social critique,
> > and deep knowledge and understanding​.*
> >
> >
> > ​Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social
> critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test
> scores.  :-)  ).
> >
> > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so
> many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"?
> > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure).
> >
> > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done"
> > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically
> > antonymous ideologies and world systems.  ​
> >
> > mike​
> >
> > *​*
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and
> >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the
> >> desire for
> >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social
> >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's
> >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a
> >> fundamental shift in social science research.
> >>
> >>
> >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/
> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >>
> >>