[Xmca-l] Re: kinship

Sun Jan 7 21:15:24 PST 2018

Michael G,

Yeah, I should have added that I find the evolutionary explanation to be a
generally useful one, and that, as I thought about it, your explanations
actually fit quite well with what Sahlins and others have described. I
think also that the idea of thinking of this in terms of double stimulation
seems like a very interesting possibility and interesting suggestion (which
I glossed over entirely! Seems that your email had two modes of stimulation
as well and I was only sharp enough to attend to one of them). It also
accords with the way that I like to think of double stimulation as sleight
of hand, as misdirection, so it is an interesting proposal to think of
symbolism as sleight of hand.

So I was obviously much to quickly dismissive in my response.

And just to give a little sense for the intellectual terrain that I'm in,
I'm arguing against what in anthropology is called a "functionalist"
approach - one in which everything (including all forms of semiosis) could
be explained in terms of how it is adaptive for the long-term survival of a
group of people. And actually I'm normally arguing for the usefulness of a
functional approach b.c. I find anthropologists these days to be far too
dismissive of what is a very useful approach.

Your sleight of hand suggestion appears at least on the surface to be very
similar to functionalist approaches that suggest that the ideational stuff
is superficial and that what matters is what it does for survival and
fitness of the individuals and the group. The trouble that anthropologists
have raised more recently is that this doesn't help us to understand the
reasons for the vast amount of variation across groups regarding how these
things are accomplished. Maybe that helps with what I'm after?

But I'm still curious why Martin got us into this mess in the first place!
And why he is interested in the concept "family". Still curious.

-greg

On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Glassman, Michael <glassman.13@osu.edu>
wrote:

> Oh Greg,
>
> Don't ask a question, read a proposed half-baked answer and then say you
> are generally skeptical of the answer and no more.
>
> What were you looking for?
>
> Michael
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson
> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2018 9:06 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: kinship
>
> Michael G,
>
> Yeah, I understand the impulse for explanations by evolutionary advantage
> (or sheer, raw personal interest/gain), but I would add that there are
> reasons to be skeptical of the totalizing nature of such explanations
> (hint: capitalism).
>
> -greg
>
> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 6:11 PM, Glassman, Michael <glassman.13@osu.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > In response to kinship and Vygotsky, here is a somewhat radical but
> > perhaps not radical at all notion.  Kinship is a form of double
> > stimulation (I hope I'm getting this right).  That is it is a cultural
> > symbol that help us remember other things about the way the complex,
> > interweaving roles of relationships work in our social groups. I'm
> > supposed to make sure that person gets food because she is my child. I
> > am supposed to maintain ties with that person because I can
> > legitimately call on them for cultural capital because they are my
> > cousin and that's the way we distribute cultural capital in this
> > situation.  I need to make sure my mother maintains a relationship
> > with her brother by bringing the brother gifts so he can take care of my
> mother if she is in trouble.
> >
> > If you are in say a hunter gatherer society I need to maintain contact
> > with that person because they are a good bush beater.  I must maintain
> > my relationship with that woman because she knows where the good nuts
> are.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
> > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson
> > Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2018 7:08 PM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: kinship
> >
> > Apologies if this is another trip round the mulberry bush (or the
> > maypole?), but this is a conversation that has, as one might imagine,
> > been quite a big deal in anthropology. Here's a quick and brief summary.
> >
> > Initially, "kinship" in anthropology was defined as the way that it
> > has traditionally been defined in European cultures - as based on
> > blood. (other forms are kinship, e.g., adoption, were seen as
> > derivative of the central trope of blood relation).
> >
> > Then along came a fellow by the name of David Schneider (I attached a
> > picture, cf. David and Martin's pictures of Malinowski). Although
> > Schneider couldn't write his way out of a paper bag, he conducted
> > field work on the Micronesian island of Yap and published a few books
> > on the subject that forever changed the way that anthropologists' think
> about kinship.
> > Essentially, he challenged this blood-based notion of kinship by
> > showing how Yapese kinship formation is not blood-based (although
> > blood based relationships are still recognized, they do not hold the
> > same sense that a blood-based notion of "family" does).
> >
> > Following Schneider, the field of kinship studies spent a bit of time
> > in a relativistic malaise, shifting between those who stuck to the old
> > view of kinship and those who refused to use the concept at all.
> >
> > Then along came work that would eventually become what has come to be
> > known as "new kinship studies". This approach sought to recover the
> > concept of "kinship" without the concept of "kinship-as-blood". In the
> > view of new kinship studies, "kinship" is understood, as Rupert Stasch
> > has put it, as "intersubjective belonging" or "mutuality of being"
> > (mentioned in the Sahlins essay that is attached).
> >
> > New kinship studies have also turned their gaze back onto kinship in
> > European/Western/American culture (and indeed, Schneider's other big
> > book was titled American Kinship). These folks have noted that even in
> > these cultures, previously thought to be entirely blood-based, one can
> > find lots of slippage from a simple model of blood-based kinship.
> > Janet Carsten is a key figure in this regard and she looks at, among
> > other things, how technologies have changed kinship formation (think
> > test-tube babies and sperm extraction from deceased persons - fun
> stuff!).
> >
> > One of the best summaries of the new kinship studies is Marshall
> > Sahlin's essay What Kinship is? I have attached it here as it has a
> > wonderful collection of examples of how kinship is formed in various
> > places around the globe.
> >
> > I guess the more interesting question for this group is: what does
> > this have to do with Vygotsky/XMCA?
> >
> > -greg
> > [image: Inline image 1]
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Martin Packer <mpacker@cantab.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > > By your definition or theirs, Michael?
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Jan 7, 2018, at 6:23 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth <
> > > wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > but plants form families, too
> > > >
> > > > the familiar is linked to family apparently in languages that have
> > > adopted
> > > > the term from Latin, but not languages as Polish or Russian
> > > >
> > > > Michael
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > --------------------
> > > > Applied Cognitive Science
> > > > MacLaurin Building A567
> > > > University of Victoria
> > > > Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2
> > > > http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth
> > > > <http://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/>
> > > >
> > > > New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics
> > > > <https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/new-
> > > directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the-
> > > mathematics-of-mathematics/>*
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Martin Packer <mpacker@cantab.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> So James,
> > > >>
> > > >> Could a childless couple in China be called a family?
> > > >>
> > > >> Or would they need to have a pig?  :)
> > > >>
> > > >> To all: In English we don’t call a childless couple a family, do we?
> > > >>
> > > >> 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 Jan 7, 2018, at 5:45 PM, James Ma <jamesma320@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Just to add an etymological aspect that you might be interested
> > > >>> to know (this is because Chines is logographical).
> > > >>>
> > > >>> According to the Chinese Oracle, family 家 has two parts: the
> > > >>> upper part 宀 refers to "room"; the lower part 豕 refers to "pig".
> > > >>> In the ancient times,
> > > people
> > > >>> raised pigs in their houses, so having pigs in a house was a
> > > >>> hallmark
> > > of
> > > >>> living. In modern Chinese, family also indicates "relationship",
> e.g.
> > > >> 亲如一家
> > > >>> as close as a family.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> James
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> *_____________________________________*
> > > >>>
> > > >>> *James Ma*  *https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa
> > > >>> <https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa>   *
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 7 January 2018 at 21:30, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> In Chinese and in Korean, the word "family" is related to
> > > >>>> housing
> > > rather
> > > >>>> than to kinship. In European languages it is the other way around.
> > > This
> > > >>>> does suggest something semantic, no?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> David Kellogg
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Recent Article in *Mind, Culture, and Activity* 24 (4)
> > > >>>> 'Metaphoric, Metonymic, Eclectic, or Dialectic? A Commentary on
> > > >>>> “Neoformation: A Dialectical Approach to Developmental Change”'
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Free e-print available (for a short time only) at
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/YAWPBtmPM8knMCNg6sS6/full
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 6:22 AM, Greg Thompson <
> > > >> greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Martin,
> > > >>>>> Well that is a difficult question to answer without knowing
> > > >>>>> what you
> > > >> mean
> > > >>>>> by "family"?
> > > >>>>> What in the world do you mean by "family"?
> > > >>>>> -greg
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 12:59 PM, Martin Packer
> > > >>>>> <mpacker@cantab.net>
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I am struggling with the way ‘family’ and ‘kinship’ have been
> > > defined,
> > > >>>> or
> > > >>>>>> not defined, in psychology and anthropology. One question
> > > >>>>>> that has
> > > >>>>> occurred
> > > >>>>>> to me is whether a word equivalent to ‘family’ exists in
> > > >>>>>> every
> > > >>>> language.
> > > >>>>>> When I Google this, Google responds ‘Ask Siri’…  :(
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Anyone have an idea?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Martin
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> --
> > > >>>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > > >>>>> Assistant Professor
> > > >>>>> Department of Anthropology
> > > >>>>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > > >>>>> Brigham Young University
> > > >>>>> Provo, UT 84602
> > > >>>>> WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu
> > > >>>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_
> > > >> source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> > > >>> Virus-free.
> > > >>> www.avast.com
> > > >>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_
> > > >> source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> > > >>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > Assistant Professor
> > Department of Anthropology
> > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > Brigham Young University
> > Provo, UT 84602
> > WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu
> > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Anthropology
> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, UT 84602
> WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>
>

-- 
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu
http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson