[Xmca-l] Re: Signing up for the LSV-MAKH discussion, version 2

[mike cole]

Hi Dana-- et al --

Martin is totally correct. If you would ask questions, for example, it
would be marvelous. Its the "purely observational" part that turns learners
into "lurkers" and that
simultaneously turns teachers into over-the-top performers, making it hard
to
participate. As you can see, i am not sufficiently knowledgeable about
several of the
people who figure in this inquiry and *I* want to learn too. Why else spend
the time
when its gorgeous in my yard and the vegetables are asking for help?

Back to learning by reading.  :-)

mike

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 3:21 PM, Martin Packer <mpacker@cantab.net> wrote:

> Dana, if you tell the group what it is that you’d most like to learn,
> you’ll satisfy Mike’s requirements.  :)
>
> We’re *all* there to learn!
>
> Martin
>
> "I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss
> matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my
> partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with
> the feeling that this also applies to myself” (Malinowski, 1930)
>
>
>
> > On Apr 23, 2018, at 3:28 PM, Walker, Dana <Dana.Walker@unco.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I guess I will need to recuse myself.  I was hoping to learn from this
> conversation, but that does not appear to be the purpose of this new
> sub-group.
> > Dana Walker
> >
> > On 4/23/18, 1:09 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of
> mike cole" <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mcole@ucsd.edu>
> wrote:
> >
> >    Hi Kim, you are now signed in I see.
> >
> >    All -- Seems like time to close the doors to group. If someone
> important is
> >    missing, please get them to sign up soon because it seems time to
> move from
> >    gathering an interested group to converting to a working group to
> produce a
> >    memorable academic
> >    result.
> >
> >    To this end,  I have exchanged notes with a couple of the people on
> the
> >    list (Natalia and Anna) who are invested in the topic, but unable to
> shift
> >    priorities to engage. They will be leaving the list so that we do not
> slip
> >    in to the "big audience is listening in" situation of xmca. I would
> >    appreciate it if others in the same circumstances would also recuse
> >    themselves, so to speak, for the time being. I promised to report
> back to
> >    xmca with the results of our efforts when we actually have some to
> report
> >    (!).
> >
> >    In this regard, in response to Peter's and Greg's notes. I hope it is
> clear
> >    that I am not
> >    seeking a "one right answer" here. Stone soups mix a lot of flavors
> from
> >    their varied
> >    ingredients. I believe our biggest service here is to make clear where
> >    there are complementarities, where, as Peter puts it, there are
> >    irreconcilable differences, and how to be clear about the underlying
> >    paradigmatic differences that convert misunderstandings into
> irreconcilable
> >    differences.
> >
> >    What are the differences that make a difference? \
> >    What are the similarities that draw some people to believe in
> >    complementarity?
> >    What difference do the differences make in practice?
> >
> >    It is this last question that seems to be crucial in a special issue.
> If we
> >    remain at the level of general theory without showing how the
> theoretical
> >    differences make a difference in our practice -- and what differences
> those
> >    practices mak-- who cares?
> >    What should young scholars entering the field know so that their
> practices
> >    are more
> >    effective (by what criteria)? Are their theoretical commitments put
> at risk
> >    by their
> >    practices?
> >
> >    I am seeing A LOT of articles now that throw around various terms as
> an
> >    interpretive frame for results in hand, but where theory is not
> guiding
> >    practice at all, and there is no evidence of self-critical next steps
> to
> >    see if the interpretive frame is more than one of many possible
> post-hoc
> >    explanations.
> >
> >    I do not know about you-all, but I feel a keen need to read and get
> >    straight the
> >    documents that we have gathered. If you are missing something, check
> out the
> >    archive of emails where they appear as attachments. We will try to
> gather
> >    them up at this end, but our volunteer fire department is being kept
> busy
> >    by my ineptness
> >    as getting the various email procedures straight.
> >
> >    Over to those we have not heard from yet.
> >    I will follow up with David on the "rotation"/ingrowing/
> internalization
> >    problem, having added Martin's objection to internalization to my
> reading
> >    list.
> >
> >    mike
> >
> >    On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 7:01 AM, Kim Anh Dang <
> dangthikimanh@gmail.com>
> >    wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Mike,
> >>
> >> Is this too late to sign up for this? Sorry I have not found the
> original
> >> email about the process to sign up for this discussion.
> >>
> >> If it is not too late, could I join please?
> >>
> >> Thanks very much.
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Kim
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>> On 19 Apr 2018, at 1:30 pm, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Maybe people do not understand the confirmation delay?
> >>> Try that out on them and lets see how it goes.
> >>>
> >>> Archive or articles url??
> >>>
> >>> sorry for the extra hassle
> >>> mike
> >>>
> >>>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 5:57 PM, Bruce Jones <bjones@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I removed the confirmation requirement for subscriptions to the
> LSV-MAKH
> >>>> mailinglist.
> >>>>
> >>>> All that's current required is my approval, which I will apply on a
> >> daily
> >>>> basis for the near future.
> >>>>
> >>>> This should help.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please refer any problems to me rather than the xmca list.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Bruce Jones
> >>>> Sys Admin, LCHC
> >>>> bjones@ucsd.edu
> >>>> 619-823-8281
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >    **This message originated from outside UNC. Please use caution when
> opening attachments or following links. Do not enter your UNC credentials
> when prompted by external links.**
> >
> >
> >
>
>