[Xmca-l] Re: Trying to frame studies of the web through perezhivanie
Andy Blunden
andyb@marxists.org
Thu Sep 27 06:12:58 PDT 2018
Michael, Myles Horton would say that you (the citizen, the
student, whatever) are the expert in your own experience.
However, you don't necessarily have the expertise needed to
solve the problems which arise from your experience. The
thing is to learn how to analyse your own experience.
Andy.
------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden
http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
On 27/09/2018 11:01 PM, Glassman, Michael wrote:
>
> Hi Henry,
>
>
>
> I’m not sure about /perezhivanie /and I too would be
> really interested in hearing more about it in this
> discussion as I would like to have a better understanding
> (I know, I should go read the special issue, I have put in
> my queue but I am not sure when I’ll get there). As far
> as experience is concerned I think this is a large part of
> Dewey’s lifelong project. Democracy for Dewey is not a
> form of government but a form of human association. A key
> question is how we both bring experience and treat
> experience in human association and use it in that
> association. I think he would say for instance giving the
> experience of the elites special value and falling into
> the habits of simply following elites because they have
> been given that position by society (and he gives general
> reasons why we do that) is inherently undemocratic.
> Democratic association means treating experience of all
> individuals experience as equal as we approach the problem
> and then treat the problem itself as vital experience
> (focus on the problem solving itself rather than falling
> in to specific roles). So how does this work, because
> some people have more experience in certain areas than
> others – well it is being open to that, but only if the
> experience actually does help in solving the problem. Very
> often the people society deem elites are not good at all
> at solving the problem. I was discussing this with some
> doctors in medical education and initially they were
> having a hard time with this. What we came to is the
> recognition that at times (no agreement on how many times)
> this works against the goals of education. If doctors
> believe they know and are the best ones to solve the
> problems they can make very bad mistakes. They should be
> taught from the beginning at least to bring the patient
> into the process, but if it is a problem that goes beyond
> habit to bring it in to a community of doctors with
> different types of experience and engage each other in
> democratic association.
>
>
>
> One other thing. Same Harris? Really? A member of the
> (play ominous music) a member of the “Intellectual Dark Web” ?
>
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> *From:*xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On Behalf Of *HENRY SHONERD
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 26, 2018 11:58 PM
> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Trying to frame studies of the web
> through perezhivanie
>
>
>
> No, Andy.
>
>
>
> The reason I asked the question is because I was
> listening to a podcast of Sam Harris
> (neuroscientist/philosopher) interviewing Yuval Noah
> Harari, an Israeli academic who wrote two very popular
> books: Sapiens, about the history of humans, and Homo
> Deus, about our future. (Interestingly, the editor of the
> piece from Dewey you linked us to remarked on Dewey’s look
> to the future.) Someone in the audience to the interview
> during a Q&A asked the question as to whether democracy
> will be viable in a future where specialized elites are,
> more and more, the only ones able to solve the problems of
> planet earth. Harari’s response was that solutions require
> elites (elite pilot, elite surgeon, etc.). We all want
> elites. But goals should reflect the experiences of
> everybody, not just of the elites. Hence, democracy may be
> messy, but the best thing going. Your description of
> movements and transformation makes total sense to me and
> would not contradict Harari, I think. As far as whether
> Vygotsky and Dewey have addressed my question, I would bet
> they did address it for their time. But nuclear weaponry,
> climate change and artifical intelligence didn’t exist
> then. Harari, in Homo Deus, seems to be addressing the
> question for our time. What do you think?
>
> Henry
>
>
>
> On Sep 26, 2018, at 9:28 PM, Andy Blunden
> <andyb@marxists.org <mailto:andyb@marxists.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
> Henry, I think that deploying concepts like
> /"perezhivanie" /or "experiences" in social and
> historical analysis just entails recognition that
> transformative experiences are collective, shared
> experiences; movements are formed and transformed by
> shared experiences (this idea goes back to Herder) and
> consequently, so are nations. Having recently read an
> oral history of the 1968 events in France (events
> which my generation shared whatever country you were
> in at the time), this is very clear. Experiences not
> only create and transform social movements, they
> transform the individual people at the same time. I
> think Vygotsky is widely interpreted as seeing
> perezhivaniya as happening "between people" but this
> is not yet quite the same thing.
>
> But I am not aware that either Vygotsky or Dewey
> explicitly treated this theme. Are you?
>
> Andy
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Andy Blunden
> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>
> On 27/09/2018 12:50 PM, HENRY SHONERD wrote:
>
> Thanks, Mike!
>
> For sure analog/digital is a sidebar. Got lost in
> the weeds.
>
>
>
> But I do have something that I think germane to
> the subject line, a question really: How does
> Dewey connect experience and democracy? And how
> about Vygotsky? In fact, would anyone point me to
> ways in which Dewey and Vygotsky connect
> experience/perrizhvanie (mass/countable) and
> democracy, or whatever form of government applies?
> I despair sometimes about the future of democracy.
> Has it ever had a present? I hope I’m not getting
> into weeds where no one wants to go. Or maybe it’s
> so obvious, it doesn’t bear wasting words?
>
> Henry
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 26, 2018, at 8:24 PM, Greg Mcverry
> <jgregmcverry@gmail.com
> <mailto:jgregmcverry@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> Yes sorry my use of analog v digital
> sidetracked thread.
>
>
>
> I spent some time considering how drastic a
> change to my methodology I would have to make
> to for switch to Dewey and experiencing.
>
>
>
> I really don't consider the web, for those who
> inhabit it, as an artifact. it is both the act
> of identity creation and identity itself. A
> dance of the selves in a networked world. A
> living part of who many people are.
>
>
>
> A piece of my MEs that is shaped by me and
> outside interest.
>
>
>
> I
>
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 9:30 PM Andy Blunden
> <andyb@marxists.org
> <mailto:andyb@marxists.org>> wrote:
>
> I found "Having an experience" the most
> useful.
>
> https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/an-experience.htm
>
> Andy
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Andy Blunden
> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>
>
> On 27/09/2018 10:52 AM, mike cole wrote:
>
> I would be helped in following this
> interesting discussion if people
> brought it back to /perezhivanie /. It
> is my reading of the recent special
> issue on perezhivanie that there is no
> firm agreement on its meaning. My
> unease was evoked when I read a note
> where the word perezhivanie had been
> replaced by the word experience. When
> I read the word experience I think
> Dewey, not Vygotsky, not Stanislavsky,
> not Vsiliuk.
>
>
>
> Mike
>
> PS
>
> What is the best discussion of
> experience and perezhivanie that
> covers a lot of Dewey, particularly
> “/Art and Experience” ? Deweyites out
> there, speak up!/
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:11 PM Edward
> Wall <ewall@umich.edu
> <mailto:ewall@umich.edu>> wrote:
>
> Henry
>
>
>
> Interesting subject. I have
> always thought Newton somewhat
> more ‘digital’ and Leibnitz
> somewhat more ‘analog’ (he used
> infinitesimals which Robinson much
> latter put on a firm mathematical
> basis) in how they, in essence,
> treat something like a point. I’ve
> seen a few calculus texts that do
> use Leibnitz’s method and there
> are some arguments that,
> mathematically speaking,
> extensions of his method (due, in
> part, to Robinson) bring some
> things into view that may be hard
> to see otherwise.
>
>
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> On Sep 26, 2018, at 4:52 PM,
> HENRY SHONERD
> <hshonerd@gmail.com
> <mailto:hshonerd@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> It took me a long time to
> understand the calculus,
> because I couldn’t "get" the
> limit theorem, which allows
> for a way to use digital means
> to arrive quickly at
> as-precise-as-you-like
> approximations of rates of
> change (in differential
> calculus) and sums (in
> integral calculus) than would
> be possible and/or practical
> with analog means of counting
> and measuring. Without such
> quickly gotten precision,
> modern engineering would be
> impossible. I thought that
> Newton and Leibnitz discovered
> the calculs independently and
> at the same time, but a quick
> look at the wiki on the
> calculus is much more complex
> than that. It’s a history, it
> seems, that adds to the issue
> of concept and a word for the
> concept.
>
> Henry
>
>
>
> On Sep 26, 2018, at 7:53
> AM, Glassman, Michael
> <glassman.13@osu.edu
> <mailto:glassman.13@osu.edu>>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Ed,
>
>
>
> This is a kind of
> interesting topic,
> including from a cultural
> perspective. My knowledge
> on this is relatively
> superficial. Bruce
> Robinson made a really
> good point to me – also in
> your message – that analog
> computers were better for
> things like differential
> equations and more pure
> mathematic stuff (I
> think). But that when it
> came to information
> processing digital was far
> superior. My thinking
> though from the cultural
> perspective is that analog
> thinking is more
> representative of the way
> humans actually think, at
> least the way I believe
> they think. The big
> argument I have with
> information processing is
> that the argument is that
> the way the computer works
> (mostly software) is
> isomorphic to the human
> mind. But I wonder how
> much of the direction our
> society has gone in the
> last thirty years, with
> the timed testing using
> multiple choice questions,
> if we are attempting to
> make the human mind
> isomorphic to the
> computer. As a friend who
> has worked at IBM for a
> lot of years told me
> recently, they are
> beginning to wonder if the
> computer is not training
> the human. I had wondered
> if we had gone the analog
> route (and right now I
> think I’m agreeing with
> Bruce, but I change
> quickly) if we might have
> gone in another direction,
> a more pure human-computer
> symbiosis. Just rambling
> on a Tuesday morning.
>
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>> *On
> Behalf Of *Edward Wall
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September
> 25, 2018 3:11 PM
> *To:* eXtended Mind,
> Culture, Activity
> <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <mailto:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re:
> Trying to frame studies of
> the web through perezhivanie
>
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> I don’t know if my
> comments are germane to
> your discussion of digital
> and analog, but I was
> involved in the 60s
> towards the tail end of
> the ‘competition'. Your
> reading makes sense to me;
> however from where I was
> sitting there were some
> nuances. In those years
> there were, in effect,
> two kinds of computing
> using ‘computers’:
> information processing and
> scientific computing. Both
> of these had an analog
> history stretching far
> back. Information
> processing was, in a
> sense, initially
> mechanical, a mechanical
> that became driven by
> electronics and eventually
> with the advent of various
> graphic devices (I include
> printers of various kinds)
> became what we see today.
> The situation with
> scientific computing was a
> little different as it has
> even a richer analog
> history. Initially,
> electronic analog devices
> had the upper hand because
> they could, in effect,
> operate in real time.
> However, as the digital
> devices became faster and
> faster, it became possible
> to, in effect, simulate an
> analog device on a digital
> machine and pragmatically
> the simulation was “good
> enough.” Thus for, in a
> sense, economic reasons
> digital ‘computers’ won
> the ‘battle.’ In a way the
> evolution is reminiscent
> of that of audio
> reproduction or using
> mathematics to model
> physical reality; it is
> amazingly effective. The
> battle, by the way, is
> still going on. If I tell
> the Amazon Alexa to play
> music a little louder, the
> increase is done in a
> digital fashion. If I turn
> the volume control on one
> of the original versionsit
> is done in an analog
> fashion. So I think you
> are right, the digital
> path doesn’t completely
> reproduce the analog path.
>
>
>
> Ed
>
> On Sep 22, 2018, at
> 9:46 AM, Glassman,
> Michael
> <glassman.13@osu.edu
> <mailto:glassman.13@osu.edu>>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Greg and Andy,
>
>
>
> I wonder if, based on
> what Andy has said, is
> might be more
> worthwhile to focus on
> the Web as (Dewey’s
> ideas on) experience
> rather
> than perezhivaniye. I
> don’t really have a
> good grasp on
> perezhivaniye, can’t
> even really spell it.
> But if you used
> Dewey’s ideas on
> experience the Web
> becomes both artefact
> and event in our
> actions. Dewey makes
> the argument multiple
> times I think that we
> cannot really know our
> tools outside of our
> experience in using
> them, and that in
> attempting to separate
> them we are
> diminishing the
> meaning of both in our
> lives. So I think
> experience actually
> would be a good way to
> describe what you are
> trying to do.
>
>
>
> Oh, also another take
> on analog and
> digital. There was a
> battle between digital
> and analogous in
> computing but my own
> reading of the history
> is that had more to do
> with how we treated
> how computers
> processed information
> and solved problems.
> I believe the crux of
> the battle was a bit
> earlier than the
> 1960s. Actually
> Vannevar Bush who some
> (me included) consider
> the father of both the
> Internet and the Web
> (well maybe a more
> distant father but the
> actual name web is
> based on one of his
> ideas I think, web of
> trails) was working on
> the idea of an
> analogous computer in
> the late forties. I am
> sure others were as
> well. The difference
> as I understand it is
> whether we wanted to
> treat the processing
> of information as
> analogous (sort of a
> linear logic) where
> one piece of
> information built off
> another piece working
> towards an answer or
> whether we wanted to
> treat information as a
> series of yes no
> questions leading to a
> solution (digital
> referring to the use
> of 0 and one as yes
> and no, although I
> always mix that up.
> Digital became
> dominant for a lot of
> reasons, not the least
> of which is because it
> is more precise and
> efficient but it is
> also far more
> limited. I often
> wonder what would have
> happened if we had
> followed Bush’s
> intuition). There are
> analog and digital
> circuits of course,
> but at least in the
> early history of the
> computer I don’t
> believe that was the
> primary discussion in
> the use of these
> terms. Of course
> that’s just my reading.
>
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>> *On
> Behalf Of *Andy Blunden
> *Sent:* Friday,
> September 21, 2018 9:46 PM
> *To:* xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <mailto:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l]
> Re: Trying to frame
> studies of the web
> through perezhivanie
>
>
>
> A few comments Greg.
>
> It seems to me that
> the web (i.w., www,
> yes?) is
> an *artefact *not
> events; each unit is a
> trace of perezhivaniya
> not a perezhivaniye as
> such; it is important
> not to conflate events
> and artefacts; just as
> an historian has to
> know that what they
> see are traces of real
> events, not the events
> as such. What you do
> with that evidence is
> something again.
>
> Just by-the-by,
> "analog" does not mean
> "original" or "real";
> it means the opposite
> of reality. The terms
> "digital" and "analog"
> originate from the
> 1960s when there were
> two types of computer.
> Analog computers
> emulate natural
> processes by
> representing natural
> processes in analogous
> electronic circuits
> based on the calculus.
> In the end digital
> computers won an
> almost complete
> victory, but for
> example, if I'm not
> mistaken, the bionic
> ear uses analog
> computing to achieve
> real-time coding of
> speech, or at least it
> did when I knew it in
> the 1980s.
>
> Andy
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Andy Blunden
> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>
> On 22/09/2018 12:57
> AM, Greg Mcverry wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
>
>
> I have been
> spending time this
> summer reading up
> on the concept of
> perezhivanie after
> our article
> discussion on
> identify of funds.
>
>
>
> I wanted to share
> a draft of my
> theoretical
> perspectie for
> feedback. Granted
> due to word count
> it will probably
> be reduced to a
> paragraph or two
> with drive by
> citations but I am
> trying to think
> this through to
> inform my design.
>
>
>
> https://checkoutmydomain.glitch.me/theoretical.html
>
>
>
> -I got a little
> feedback but from
> Russian scholars
> in other fields
> (literature
> mainly) that I
> missed the meaning
> by being too
> neutral and I
> needed to get at
> "growing from
> one's misery" or
> another person
> said "brooding
> over the bad stuff
> that happened that
> makes you who you
> are" So I want to
> make sure I
> capture the struggle.
>
>
>
> -I am not diving
> into this now but
> I am also
> considering the
> identify and
> culture of a local
> web and how that
> plays out into how
> we shapes funds of
> identity as we
> create online spaces.
>
>
>
> -Finally is
> applying this lens
> with adult
> learners not
> appropriate? What
> does it mean when
> you actively want
> to tweak the
> environment of
> learners to reduce
> experiencing as
> struggle and
> increase
> experience as
> contemplation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20180927/a4e7834c/attachment.html
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list