[Xmca-l] Re: structure and agency

[Huw Lloyd]

Annalisa,

As I am not your teacher, it may be wisest to simply let this go. I think
an instructive and questioning response would require an invitation, which
is often implicit in the thoughtful exchanges I have had on this forum.

Best,
Huw

On Sun, 5 Jul 2020 at 07:52, Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu> wrote:

> Huw, et al
>
> I am not referring to synecdoche as a contextual pattern that alters
> stimulus response into stimulus-context-response. You are saying that, not
> me.
>
> I was saying that synecdoche is an example of a pattern(period). And the
> "logic" of this particular pattern is that it is not linear but
> bi-directional in its definition, and what determines the logic is the
> context.
>
> Perhaps an appropriate analogy might be epigenetics. We know that the DNA
> structure for a particular person may activate (for certain parts of the
> DNA) based upon certain other particular activators in the environment, but
> we have no way (yet) to determine the actual mechanisms because of the
> contextual role of the interaction, something far more complex to map, to
> pattern.
>
> We might look at the pandemic the same way. There is nothing linear about
> how the virus has spread. It's environmental, it's social, and it's
> bio-dynamic. It's all together a unified development. One cannot divide it
> into parts. Just as one cannot divide a symphony into playing instruments,
> it all comes to us as a unified experience, yet different for each
> individual, why? because of context, not cognitive development, as you put
> it.
>
> If not for the social delays the virus would not have taken hold to the
> degree that it has. That isn't stimulus-response. It is a pattern. And the
> pattern is predictable in the sense that we can model the pattern and
> determine its growth can become exponential in certain contexts.
>
> What is stimulous-response about any of this? Nothing is stimulus
> response. It's a pattern.
>
> We might say it is a pattern inclusive of social denial as a variable in
> the environment constitutes by many other dynamics. But stimulus-response
> is simply a dualistic and myopic tool that will not tell us anything. The
> virus isn't isolated to one city like Godzilla in downtown Tokyo.
>
> We must include the environment. That is why I maintain a pattern is a
> better way to model.
>
> One can't limit the spread of the virus to what is conscious and what is
> cognitive development and what are signs, because it has to do not only
> with the social dynamic, it has to do with airplanes, with cultures who are
> more affectionate than others, with economies, soccer games in large
> stadiums, with social notions over power and political tensions. It has to
> do with geographies and the densities of people, the placement of hospitals
> and how many ventilators are available.
>
> These are all patterns that coalesce in particular ways, that once we
> study them we might hope to understand them with more predictability. We
> hope that these patterns can be tipped enough to create different more
> responsive patterns that we hope will be more beneficial to us in terms of
> social health. Who can say?
>
> But our worldview must change.
>
> If you decide to limit everything about human behavior to cognition as
> something happening in the head, if that is what you are saying, I'm not
> sure, you are limiting swaths of information outside the head, and I'm not
> talking about signs or structures.
>
> What is easy to do with Vygotsky is to melt back into a neo-Pavlovian
> stance by reducing signs into stimulous that produces particular activity.
> A sign happens in the world, it's not divorced from it. Signs are not the
> material of behavior, of activity. They are perceptions shaped by cultural
> endeavors and circumstances in time and space in a unified way. And when I
> say time and space, I mean environment, or better context.
>
> Edwin Hutchins's Cognition in the Wild might be a great book to illustrate
> what I am attempting to convey, as it concerns marine navigation as a
> cultural practice. The stars are in the sky, and they move as the earth
> turns. Navigation is full of patterns (i.e., constellations, charts, maps,
> tides, time schedules, etc), and these coalesce into an activity of
> navigation, but how that manifests has to do with cultures, with what one
> is navigating (by sea, by air, by land?), which is nothing by contextual.
> It's not structural, it's not behavioral. What is the behavior of the
> stars? What is the structure of the ocean?
>
> The "material" is the world, but also our bodies and minds. Any signs we
> partake are indicative or our particular cultural ontology, the way we
> divide up the world to orient to it accordingly. But we could not create
> that ontology without the material of the world and our placement in it.
>
> I feel that a discussion of cognition defined of humans as bubbles of
> consciousness, some at a higher level than others, that "generate signals"
> from one bubble to another, like radio towers through a vacuum of empty
> space, is simply not accurate. It's still dualistic and isolates the human
> as something "different" from everything else that is here on this planet
> and universe. It's a strange geocentrism but this time about the
> human-mind-as-bubble, as the center of the universe, not the earth, this
> time around.
>
> There are different forms of consciousness everywhere around us. In plant
> life, in animals, to say the least. When we make ourselves as-if-superior
> by dividing ourselves from everything else, we are the ones who lose the
> meaning of what it is to manifest out OF something contextual. This
> separateness is an illusion, but it also allows a kind of mind that becomes
> incapable of empathy, of seeing the whole picture, of accepting change, and
> I'd say various other pathologies.
>
> Maybe I have not understood you, which is entirely possible. But that is
> how I see the matter at this juncture.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Annalisa
> ------------------------------
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, July 3, 2020 3:07 PM
> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: structure and agency
>
>
> *  [EXTERNAL]*
> What you are referring to as synechdoche (metonymy) as a contextual
> patterning that enriches stimulus-response dynamics to form a triadic
> relation (stimulus-context-response), is what I call symbol or orientation.
> Signs inform or account for orientation, which may not be conscious. For me
> the scope of orientation is principally contingent upon cognitive
> development. This is all largely in agreement with Vygotsky. However
> Vygotsky, especially in his more frequently known writings, did not
> explicitly write about the context, but rather focused upon mediating signs
> making up the structure of activity. In this regard, it is also worth
> comparing with Leontyev's activity. In my own writings this is described in
> my studies of active orientation, which in addition to the theoretical work
> studies signs-in-use in an experimental and developmental context and
> infers orientation.
>
> Since then I have come across more material but everything I have written
> there still remains consistent with my views and understandings.
>
> Huw
>
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 at 20:53, Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu> wrote:
>
> Andy, David, Huw, et al XMCArs,
>
> Aren't logic and sign actually patterns (or arrangements) of other
> material things and events in time and space?
>
> I was reading an article in the NYT that used the word "synecdoche," a
> figure of speech in which a part is used for the whole or the whole for a
> part. It's an interesting word to me because it is a pattern of "this for
> that" when pertaining to wholes and parts and it is not uni-directional but
> flows in both directions.
>
> The nature of logic and of signs is that they are referential, like the
> act of pointing.
>
> Would the pattern embedded within a logic or a sign be likened to the
> definition of a word?
>
> Could it be that the evolutionary hardwired-ability for humans to perform
> facial recognition (i.e., babies and their caregivers) translate and
> develop into other forms of pattern recognition (through learning), such as
> the sound of a word that is learned first through hearing and then through
> pointing and then through speaking.
>
> I also wonder if patterns would be a more sophisticated pathway to handle
> the limitations of a stimulus-response model for behavior, which seems
> oppressively myopic and decontextualized in its linearity. On the other
> hand, a pattern is dimensional and aspectival as well as environmental, and
> likely easier to contextualize (and perhaps harder to decontextualize).
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Annalisa
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> on behalf of Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 1, 2020 10:11 PM
> *To:* xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: structure and agency
>
>
> *  [EXTERNAL]*
>
> Your observations square with ever so milder versions of what I have
> experienced and heard re the DDR. I remember as liberating the total
> absence of advertising and even the annoying absence of a
> customer-service-provider mentality, and at the same time being covertly
> approach for illicit foreign exchange transactions made me feel dirty and
> oozed oppression. Anyway, I don't think this is a structure/agency issue.
> The Chinese leadership know exactly what they are doing. Your observations
> about the US more clearly implicate structure/agency distinctions, in my
> view.
>
> As to Logic and Language, as I have previously remarked in this
> connection, David, for a man with a hammer everything is a nail. One of the
> problems is for people to presume that Logic (and concepts) is some kind of
> non-material entity, while speech and action are somehow more material. If
> you see these forms of human life as somehow "immaterial" then any rational
> account of human life is going appear "idealist" but the "idealism" is
> really on the other foot.
>
> andy
> ------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Hegel for Social Movements
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!XG20jZAulcz4arWPBi7LhZYB_jxeuQVJcTP3B-xAOd_aKMu7wM_bQr0x0D1qy15a4vHSTw$>
> Home Page
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!XG20jZAulcz4arWPBi7LhZYB_jxeuQVJcTP3B-xAOd_aKMu7wM_bQr0x0D1qy17IvkEsJQ$>
> On 2/07/2020 12:11 pm, David Kellogg wrote:
>
> This morning I have heard, from two very different human voices, that
> China is a totalitarian state in which the political structure inexorably
> determines agency. The first speaker, on an arts programme, cited his work
> in producing the London Olympics opening ceremony "in defiance" of the one
> which opened the Beijing Olympics: he set about artistically counterposing
> viscerality to pageantry. The second, on a science programme, spoke in awe
> of the ability of the municipal government of Wuhan to test the entire
> population in ten days--an achievement that he--rightly--valued higher than
> the construction of two large hospitals during the same time frame. It is
> interesting that both speakers denied that Chinese people might actually be
> exercising agency in both situations.
>
> I am trying to square this with my own experience in China. I was naive
> about a lot of things, but I don't think repression was one of them: I had
> certainly experienced repressive political structures in Sudan, Algeria,
> and Syria, in addition to my own country, where at the age of fourteen I
> had to sign an affidavit declaring that I was not a member of the Communist
> Party in order to get a summer gig at an A&W root beer stand! On Chinese
> television I heard of demonstrators being shot in the streets in
> Beijing, student leaders executed in Shanghai and sit-in protestors cut in
> half by trains; in Xinjiang and Guangzhou I witnessed public executions
> myself, and I certainly knew people who were imprisoned for their role in
> strikes, even when that role was merely acting as a mediator between
> workers and cops. I was fired from jobs for making statements of simple
> historical fact in Beijing and again in Xiamen, and I knew that I could not
> sue to get my job back. But there were three things which seemed to set me
> free, and which still sets life in China apart for me.
>
> The first was that for the first time in my life I was absolutely at
> liberty to say that I was a Marxist, even a Communist (although people
> would laugh at me and shake their heads and patiently explain that I didn't
> really know what I was on about). The second was that on public streets the
> vast majority of texts that I studied (I was still learning to read
> Chinese) had absolutely nothing to do with the exchange of commodities, the
> sale of information or branding of any kind. The third, however, was that
> almost everybody, including most Party members I knew, were unofficial,
> off-the-record, between-you-and-me dissidents of one kind or another. It
> struck me that the situation was really topsy-turvy. In the USA, where I
> was born, voting allowed a vast majority of people to regularly register
> as official dissenters, but in private there were hardly any people who
> opposed the social system as whole, that is, as a structure.
>
> (Isn't "contradiction" really a linguistic rather than a logical category?
> For that matter, isn't logic just a tidied up form of language, just
> as dialectics--hence the name--is a tidied up version of human voices?)
>
> David Kellogg
> Sangmyung University
>
> New Article: Ruqaiya Hasan, in memoriam: A manual and a manifesto.
> Outlines, Spring 2020
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tidsskrift.dk/outlines/article/view/116238__;!!Mih3wA!X8UcqNF4fpY0GR3Hatw7nXzHDrygqL_xYwaFOYHs5A-SztxKh5QW4Q0NuGt3utdIlQMPLQ$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tidsskrift.dk/outlines/article/view/116238__;!!Mih3wA!V5MRtRT8itUiBVI4OZBrmcb1ljjSLlhO5yXi4SKhmoZv9BAhTqNkhbPPKXe8T0U6JeoFlA$>
> New Translation with Nikolai Veresov: *L.S. Vygotsky's Pedological Works* *
> Volume One: Foundations of Pedology*"
>  https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9789811505270__;!!Mih3wA!X8UcqNF4fpY0GR3Hatw7nXzHDrygqL_xYwaFOYHs5A-SztxKh5QW4Q0NuGt3utfYpky0sg$ 
>
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9789811505270__;!!Mih3wA!V5MRtRT8itUiBVI4OZBrmcb1ljjSLlhO5yXi4SKhmoZv9BAhTqNkhbPPKXe8T0W1gPUEew$>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 9:02 AM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> wrote:
>
> I am guessing that the aim of replacing "contradiction" with
> "disco-ordination" is locate the essential process in activity rather than
> logic. This is a worthy aim, but it is mistaken for two reasons. (1)
> Disco-ordination actually refers to behaviour rather than activity, that
> is, physical movements that are not necessarily fulfilling the actors'
> reasons or intentions. While such disco-ordination can disrupts norms and
> aggravate conflict, I don't believe they are impulses to social change,
> because the norms are not confronted by alternative norms - one has to look
> to why norms are not binding, and (2) People do things for reasons and
> insofar as people do different things for the same reason, which could
> possibly cause disco-ordination, I don't think this is threatening to a
> social formation. A certain amount of disco-ordination can be a stabilising
> thing.
>
> The fact is that social formations are ideal orders, not just patterns of
> movement.
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Hegel for Social Movements
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!UO3GqHpf8x54Sb0F4DVygXFECH7CEZ4Md34ReAC-0dwNTy61-MyqVAlQKrWeKY0gE4YOCw$>
> Home Page
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!UO3GqHpf8x54Sb0F4DVygXFECH7CEZ4Md34ReAC-0dwNTy61-MyqVAlQKrWeKY163svBLw$>
> On 2/07/2020 2:44 am, mike cole wrote:
>
> Andy et
>
> Is it permissible to substitute the term, discoordination for
> contradiction at least at the empirical level.  We observe selective
> discoordination and infer the contradictions?
> mike
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 9:47 PM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> wrote:
>
> "Contradiction" is only a coherent concept insofar as there is a "logic",
> i.e., some institution. The general idea is that all logics contain such
> contradictions. Institutions "try" to eliminate contradictions and
> instantiate a "logic," but it turns out to be a losing battle.
>
> Nonetheless, an institution can live forever without changing despite
> harbouring contradictions. The structure has to be subject to critique; the
> contradictions have to be exposed and pursued. Movement and change is not
> automatic.
>
> But yes, you are right, life, let alone social life, is impossible without
> "institutions." We continue building that aeroplane as it flies through the
> sky. Without institutions, norms, shared meanings, collaborative
> activities, trust we will all die.
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Hegel for Social Movements
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!Vbo2U2NxoEFafJtBUR40AtvkBVYT1KAKn_9LlHZa_fRicMs7nWhBIVZhw2mOPL4Daq3h8g$>
> Home Page
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!Vbo2U2NxoEFafJtBUR40AtvkBVYT1KAKn_9LlHZa_fRicMs7nWhBIVZhw2mOPL4TN5Z-gg$>
> On 1/07/2020 2:16 pm, mike cole wrote:
>
> Andy -- You write that " The structure is *built around*
> *contradictions"  *
> Would it be useful to say, also, that "structures *contain* the *contradictions
> *minist in social life?
> I am asking because i am thinking of institutions as sociocultural
> structures that coordinate constituent
> activities sufficiently to enable human biocuturalsocial re-production..
> mike
> and g'night!
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 9:06 PM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> wrote:
>
> At first glance Hegel and Marx appear to have erected giant structures,
> which explicate how a social formation reproduces itself. I.e., they look
> like structuralists. But look again. At the heart of Hegel's *Logic *and
> Marx's *Capital *is a contradiction. The structure is built around
> *contradictions*. Under the impact of critique, at a certain point, the
> contradiction(s) unfolds as social transformation.
>
> Yrjo Engestrom has endeavoured to incorporate this idea in his system with
> its 4-levels of contradiction, and Ilyenkov explains in detail how Marx and
> Hegel did it in his 1960 monograph "The Abstract and Concrete in Marx's
> *Capital*."
>
> andy
> ------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Hegel for Social Movements
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!VrJ6ogmE0QXMa3fMTmRp6YRhgzkXCIbZ0jSEci2-B6Gvtituftx_3TXEEt7HTGjjKVnsjw$>
> Home Page
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!VrJ6ogmE0QXMa3fMTmRp6YRhgzkXCIbZ0jSEci2-B6Gvtituftx_3TXEEt7HTGhl_8RK9w$>
> On 1/07/2020 1:42 pm, mike cole wrote:
>
> David,Andy. So what has transformational agency to do with the
> distinctions you are making?
> Mike
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 7:04 PM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> wrote:
>
> I beg to differ with you David. "Structuralism" dates from the beginning
> of the 20th century and poststructuralism from the 1970s roughly. That
> there were structuralist tendencies in Marx's writing is undeniable, and
> likewise with Hegel and with Vygotsky. But as I see it, "Structuralism" and
> "Poststructuralism" are specific historically bounded projects. I agree
> that both of these projects have had an impact or influence on the
> development of Critical Theory and CHAT, but neither are "structuralist."
>
>    -
>    https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/concrete-historicism.pdf__;!!Mih3wA!X8UcqNF4fpY0GR3Hatw7nXzHDrygqL_xYwaFOYHs5A-SztxKh5QW4Q0NuGt3utebGl13Cg$ 
>    <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/concrete-historicism.pdf__;!!Mih3wA!VhKMxK62RuHFPtSiafVaIhcBWu6Corlc8Jwv8StB7faR8dToPmZRX0GyVindCZxvdPoTlw$>
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Hegel for Social Movements
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!VhKMxK62RuHFPtSiafVaIhcBWu6Corlc8Jwv8StB7faR8dToPmZRX0GyVindCZwfv_bGZg$>
> Home Page
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!VhKMxK62RuHFPtSiafVaIhcBWu6Corlc8Jwv8StB7faR8dToPmZRX0GyVindCZwpXrkYXg$>
> On 1/07/2020 10:35 am, David H Kirshner wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> Marx and Vygotsky both were structural theorists. My guess/impression is
> that as critical theory and sociocultural theory evolved both have been
> influenced by poststructural thought, but neither has made a true
> poststructural turn; nor have scholars in either arena really grappled with
> the implications of such a turn.
>
> David
>
>
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On Behalf Of *mike cole
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 30, 2020 6:59 PM
> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>
>
>
> That was a very clarifying note, David, thanks. So is cultural marxism one
> way to deal with mutability or stability of structure?
>
> Most of the marxist social science I am reading these days focuses on
> transformational agency and take their roots from Vygotsky
>
> and  (various )predecessors, so this is post-structuralist Marxism?
>
>
>
> mike
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 6:19 AM David H Kirshner <dkirsh@lsu.edu> wrote:
>
> S’ma et al.,
>
> The issue of victimhood and “victim mentality” is roiled by crosscurrents
> of modernist and postmodernist, structuralist and poststructuralist
> thought. Victim mentality is always perspectival—I have been wronged. In a
> modernist frame, the perspective of victim may be able to be aligned with
> an overarching (i.e., structuralist) account that authorizes its
> significance. Critical theory, stemming from Marxist theory, is such a
> structuralist account—or perhaps, more accurately, a structuralist project
> as it is not clear that critical theorists have arrived at consensus about
> the theory. Postmodernism and poststructuralism abandon the structuralist
> mandate, accepting that there is no bedrock structural perspective that can
> encompass the variety of local perspectives. So my sense of my victimhood
> is simply my perspective, and the project of establishing its viability is
> purely a political one. Any of us can experience ourselves as victims, and
> assert a political claim to that effect. Interestingly, it is the political
> Right that embodies this poststructuralist critique of victimhood, and the
> political Left that orients itself in structuralism.
>
> David
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On
> Behalf Of *Simangele Mayisela
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 30, 2020 5:25 AM
> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Annalisa and colleagues
>
>
>
> Thank you for processing my earlier articulation in such an impeccable
> manner. I see how your method of using definitions as a foundation for
> conversations, specially sensitive conversations in a multicultural forum
> such as this one. You have beautifully demonstrated that in your response
> below and in some of your previous enlightening contributions.
>
>
>
> Your reference to the George Orwell’s 1984  is quite fitting in this
> situation; when  a victim expresses that they are victimised, they are then
> “gaslighted”, as there is something seriously wrong with their mentality –
> the victim mentality. It is short of saying “do not think” that you are
> victimised even if there is “victimisation”, or you “were” victimised.
> Perhaps we can accept better with “survivors” but the conditions and the
> context under which” survivors” continue to survive.
>
>
>
> Ok then, then the survivors develop a concept, “Critical Theory”  to name,
> and shine light on the hidden aspects of “survivorhood”, where the
> conditions for thinking about or “reflecting” surviving are determined and
> controlled, even those who have power – “scientific or unscientific”.
>
>
>
> There is undeniable history of efforts and activities of survivors of
> different forms oppressions and genocides,  where generations of survivors
> have shown resilience and the ability to move on, but only to be met with
> new and systematic ways of  psychological and economic oppression. Leaving
> them with no option but to survive by different means at the disposal,
> including becoming religious with the home for future redemption. Of more
> interest to me are those who keep trying using   “enlightened” ways by
> intellectually explaining to themselves as a collective and to the
> oppressor with the hope to bring about change for their situation – the
> “doing something about their situation.” Using the analogy of a monopoly
> game Tameka Jones Young
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10158129729940856&id=522190855__;!!Mih3wA!X8UcqNF4fpY0GR3Hatw7nXzHDrygqL_xYwaFOYHs5A-SztxKh5QW4Q0NuGt3utd_LPEfEg$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fnam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com*2F*3Furl*3Dhttps*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fm.facebook.com*2Fstory.php*3Fstory_fbid*3D10158129729940856*26id*3D522190855__*3B!!Mih3wA!VX_uq7D0v43DAvM9nEC46ZStRpXjResRedVQUr9zhmuKYSRyZ34CmtUCYxxDViAr2G5ncg*24*26data*3D02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C3980c805ddde48ffcda308d81ce02bb5*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291096420272281*26sdata*3DwTDn9GfEmrNWmDs7ZKaYDsB6FZCeMUVhqsyWF9XzaeE*3D*26reserved*3D0__*3BJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!Mih3wA!XgF09Z_7Jf5M7eawhdePrcY6Ga6UVHH-Wen9Vq7UBXWfzeFgYdOg20ED5HIi0LWe6MGJgg*24&data=02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C793f465e2c064597a6ec08d81d52307d*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291586126470977&sdata=Uuw6Xaz8ott*2FqhOnnPfx1NVKD7viv29J7hBq6yDOtQU*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUqKioqKioqKioqKioqKiolJSoqKioqKioqJSUqJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!Mih3wA!WBb97M0rnCTuW6rx_rhYvkAPQLCK1TlHV1j2_71whs8hUwhp1NiF5m7opU1Tv5D4stnMCQ$>
> (please watch if you a minute to spare) , has a way that highlights why
> “victim mentality” is not an appropriate, or rather demeaning of those who
> are working hard to be free, let alone to be at par with the oppressors’
> “survivors” if I may say so. The video is in the context of the gruesome
> protests after the murder of George Floyd, perhaps what is important for
> this conversation is the content, the meaning of her articulations, though
> her expressions are accompanied by very strong emotions, I found her
> monopoly analogy worth my reflection.
>
>
>
> I must say I owe it to myself to try draw some links between Cultural
> Historical Activity Theory, Critical Race Theory and Social Justice theory,
> I admire scholars, some who maybe in this thread who have used these
> theoretical lenses in their work in trying to understand mental development
> it the global context. I think Cultural Historical Activity Theory maybe
> one of the appropriate tools to explain that which concerns Lindsay; how
> Critical theory is finding its way of infiltrating critical spaces in
> communities, including academia, which he sees as nothing but “Grievance
> Studies”  and threatening scientific thinking.
>
>
>
> It has been good partaking in these conversations. I think reflections can
> continue to happen in private at a personal level and in smaller groups.
> What is important is; yes need to reflect on our thinking and our learning.
> I myself have learned a lot from this thread, in conscious and unconscious
> ways I transform as I read your contributions, to the point I  at times
> pleasantly surprise myself quoting what was said in this thread.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> S’ma
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On
> Behalf Of *Annalisa Aguilar
> *Sent:* Friday, 26 June 2020 22:37
> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>
>
>
> Hello S'ma and venerable others,
>
>
>
> I was intrigued by this notion of Critical Theory being posed as a
> "grievance science," as if taking on a maudlin cape of "victim mentality"
> around the shoulders, etc.
>
>
>
> It seems something of a cop-out to reduce it to that. It is almost as
> grievous as Holocaust deniers.
>
>
>
> Still, to consider it analytically, Critical Theory by design is intended
> to uncover the ideologies by which certain social sciences have been taught
> and promulgated. It's de-constructive, right? This stance might be seen as
> nihilistic, but there has been some valuable work from stripping off the
> veneer of power structures in order to analyze its underlying logic, which
> in many cases has been arbitrary and reveals that privilege is usually not
> earned through merit.
>
>
>
> When considering relations of power, it's easy (albeit insensitive) for
> someone of privilege to name the powerless as "victims," but when this is
> done, it is only in an objection when victims call themselves victims, as
> if they have no right to do so.
>
>
>
> So who has the right to use this word "victim"?
>
>
>
>
>
> I feel there is a strange aura about the word that is likened to the word
> "masochistic" and it's *that baggage* I am wrangling with in my post here.
>
>
>
> Must there be prejudice cast upon those who are actual and legitimate
> victims. There seems intertwined in the meaning of the word something
> unquantifiable but that does result in "blaming the victim" dynamics, and
> even more insidious, gaslighting, and these have results of its own harmful
> effects. (Like when we say "to add insult to injury").
>
>
>
> Can no one use the word "victim" anymore?
>
>
>
> Frequently people use the word "survivor," which does have connotations of
> resilience and fortitude against odds (of being victimized). But when we
> consider the word "survivor" when used as the name of a reality game show
> (in the early naughts). where people choose to put themselves in difficult
> circumstances on deserted islands to overcome these circumstances by their
> wits, to then be "voted off the island" by the other "survivors." Talk
> about social Darwinism!
>
>
>
> I feel there is still something the word "survivor" leaves unspoken about
> the representation of a person who has been a target of prejudice, crime,
> neglect, or abuse, whether intentionally or not.
>
>
>
> Curious, I looked up the definitions of "victim" and found these:
>
>    1. a person who suffers from a destructive or injurious action or
>    agency: a victim of an automobile accident.
>    2. a person who is deceived or cheated, as by his or her own emotions
>    or ignorance, by the dishonesty of others, or by some impersonal agency: a
>    victim of misplaced confidence; the victim of a swindler; a victim of an
>    optical illusion.
>    3. a person or animal sacrificed or regarded as sacrificed: war
>    victims.
>    4. a living creature sacrificed in religious rites.
>
> When I look up synonyms for "victim" I find this:
>
> casualty, fatality, martyr, sufferer, butt, clown, dupe, fool, gambit,
> gopher, gudgeon, gull, hireling, immolation, innocent, mark, patsy, pawn,
> pigeon, prey, pushover, quarry, sacrifice, scapegoat, stooge, sucker,
> underdog, wretch, babe in woods, easy make, easy mark, hunted, injured
> party, sitting duck, sitting target, soft touch.
>
>
>
> I did the same for the term survivor:
>
>    1. a person or thing that survives.
>    2. Law. the one of two or more designated persons, as joint tenants or
>    others having a joint interest, who outlives the other or others.
>    3. a person who continues to function or prosper in spite of
>    opposition, hardship, or setbacks.
>
> Synoymns:
>
> balance, debris, leftovers, legacy, oddments, remainder, remnant,
> remnants, residue, rest, scraps, surplus, trash, odds and ends, orts
>
> The third definition seems  the lest frequent usage, or is it the most
> recent accepted meaning?
>
>
>
> It is odd to consider victims as designated parties of sacrifice; and
> survivors to be considered mere leftovers.
>
>
>
> Is it that the life energy of victims are like easily accessible batteries
> to be utilized for the benefit of those not sacrificed? Isn't that what
> criminals do? To appropriate the property or energy of others for their own
> unearned benefit and advancement?
>
>
>
> Is that fitness or crime?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> t the same time to be a survivor seems to be something left less whole.
>
>
>
>
>
> What then would one call an individual or group who has been overpowered
> against their self-agency by another individual or group? Is there a word
> without these undertowing currents of meaning?
>
>
>
> We can say oppressed, but no one likes to say "I have been oppressed." or
> "I am oppressed," just as no one likes to say "I have been victimized," "I
> am a victim," or "My society is victimized by your society," or "My
> ancestors were enslaved by yours."
>
>
>
> And yet, these would be factual pronouncements, were legitimate
> individuals (victims) of those actual experiences to describe themselves in
> this fashion.
>
>
>
> Would it be no different than an individual saying, "I have been an
> oppressor." or "I oppress." No one likes to say "I victimize others," "I am
> a perpetrator," or "My society victimizes your society," or "My ancestors
> enslaved yours."
>
>
>
> The problem in making these sorts of statements is that while factual and
> descriptive, they can actually be twisted into being prescriptive. As if to
> say, "I did this and I can do it again because that's who I am." or "This
> happened to me and it can happen again because that's who I am."
>
>
>
> While there are people such as this Lindsay (I did not watch the video),
> who can throw about "victimization" as if it were a shameful badge to wear,
> I don't see anyone of that camp using the same disdain to describe those
> who performed grave injustices against others, to perhaps utter a phrase
> like "perpetrator of injustices", that might invoke that same shadow of
> shame. To my estimation, whatever the words, it would be right and just
> they should provide that  shadow of shame, given the injustices that
> Critical Theory is attempting to understand, without further empowering
> perpetrators and without further disempowering victims.
>
>
>
> Is the reason for this blindspot or lapse because a crime performed in
> past cannot be adjusted to correct for the crime, that it somehow means
> justice cannot be performed? In a sort of "shrugged shoulders - c'est la
> vie" kind of attitude? That no one believes exhuming the "dead bodies" from
> "unmarked graves" worth the unpleasantness of the task?
>
>
>
> Why is it easy to commit the crime, but so hard to bend the arc of justice
> to meet the crime?
>
>
>
> In the days of the American Wild West, justice was doled out too quickly,
> but now it seems it is too slowly.
>
>
>
> This is why I wonder how to consider science when we are talking about
> power structures. What is scientific about justice/injustice? Power seems
> unscientific. It is arbitrary. Or is it?
>
>
>
> Were we to describe the cause and effect of such power structures and
> their internal reasoning, it would start to sound like Nazi propaganda, or
> the promotion of eugenics.
>
>
>
> I'm reminded of a Bill Moyers interview I saw many years ago, the name of
> the guest I don't remember. I only recall he was a politico for the George
> W Bush campaign, and the fellow claimed his favorite book was Orwell's
> 1984, as if to say that it was an instruction booklet on how to create the
> kind of society he wanted. The blatant honesty was breathtaking.
>
>
>
> Reading S'ma's post made me aware of how in the case of (all forms of)
> oppression it's rare for the oppressor to say, "I have some self-reflection
> to do to answer for the deeds of my ancestors, to make up for the
> injustices suffered by your ancestors," or "My sense of privilege allowed
> me to oppress you, and I don't feel right about that, so I will stop that
> now. I see the errors of my ways."
>
>
>
> It feels there is no obligation for reconciliation because such folk
> percieve the cement of history has been poured and dried. "It's in the
> past, let's move on."
>
>
>
> There is something absurd about the tacit agreement to avoid self-naming,
> and I'm trying to sort out how it might be not to be so absurd sounding.
>
> Has anyone a hand up to provide me on this reflection?
>
>
>
> I'm not sure I'm articulating this very well, but that is my best attempt.
> Forgive any flaws in my reasoning, and of course the typos there above.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Annalisa
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> on behalf of Simangele Mayisela <simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za>
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 25, 2020 6:04 AM
> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>
>
>
> *  [EXTERNAL]*
>
> Hi Andy and Alfredo
>
>
>
> Thank you for responding to my communication, and for viewing  the video I
> referred to in my previous email. Let me say that the connection between
> the current conversation about “scientific” knowledge (in this case in
> relation to  “levels” of mental development and “ideology”) and James
> Lindsay’s argument on Critical Theory having no scientific basis (in the
> video) is this:
>
>
>
> Lindsay and his colleagues believe that Critical Theory, I suppose with
> its shoots like Critical Race Theory, Critical Race Feminist theory,
>  Identity Theories, etc. do not have a scientific base but are a  movement
> which they call “Grievance studies”,  that perpetuates “self-pity” and
> “victim mentality”. They further went on to produce fake scientific study
> “dog rape culture and feminism” known as “hoax science” as evidence of how
> unscientific “grievance studies” are;  most of which are of course are
> situated in the social sciences. This further exposed the paucity in the
> system of peer reviews in scientific journals, which some believe are also
> tainted by ideological predispositions – my fear is that this introduces
> mistrust in the notion of review processes of scientific journals -  which
> we have to be concerned about.
>
>
>
> The reason I brought up Lindsay’s argument to the picture is: while I am
> not certain if I wholly agree with Lindsay’s argument on Critical Theories,
> I  am however fascinated by the fact that they confirm the influence of
> ideological position an individual or rather a “scientist” holds,  ( an
> idea alluded to by some,  earlier in this thread). I believe, as much as we
> aspire to be objective in our pursuit of scientific enquiry, the narratives
> associated with our scientific knowledge(s) are likely to be tainted with
> ideologically biases or historicity. The likes of Lindsay and Weinstein
> bring to our attention the dangers of the exclusion of the masses in the
> name of “scientific evidence” – who in this day of rapid technological
> connection the collective is gradually become global rather than in
> specific localities. Even those that deemed to have “primitive mental
> functioning” or “unsophisticated” mental functioning, their unexpected
> ability to infiltrate academia and other spaces with Critical Theory  like
> a  “Trojan Horse”, that’s according to Bret Weinstein (
> po.nl/2020/06/20/must-watch-joe-rogan-with-bret-weinstein-critical-theory-is-basically-a-trojan-horse/
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__http*3A*2F*2Fpo.nl*2F2020*2F06*2F20*2Fmust-watch-joe-rogan-with-bret-weinstein-critical-theory-is-basically-a-trojan-horse*2F__*3B!!Mih3wA!QCD7ed0aCRAAlp7GdBrl0meYtbgs9bxM8e7Zg-RtwtTHcq2MHVUupotmjSed87zhqcRqSA*24&data=02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C793f465e2c064597a6ec08d81d52307d*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291586126480974&sdata=OgkwRQ102d*2BW*2FUntR5jqwUD44OozPBxwZ495zg7NrtI*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!Mih3wA!WBb97M0rnCTuW6rx_rhYvkAPQLCK1TlHV1j2_71whs8hUwhp1NiF5m7opU1Tv5As5j44Bw$>
> ) seems to surprise us. I wonder though, if Critical Theorists' Trojan
> Horse is scientific evidence of “self-pity”, “victim mentality”,
> unsophisticated mental functioning, … (we can add other classifying
> adjectives to describe all those who have not developed “scientific
> tools”).
>
>
>
> My reference to Lindsay and Marxism, is related to some of the sources
> that I have encountered earlier, clearly not on this YouTube video I
> referred you to, but it is  within this line of debates about “scientific”
> knowledge”.
>
>
>
> It seems to me that the association of  Paulo Freire’s  “Education for
> the Oppressed” to "victim mentality" is kind of twisted and perhaps mistook
> for “Education for the Depressed”, which is unfortunate, especially if we
> take into consideration all the publications by Freire, like Education for
> Liberation. Nevertheless, the Trojan Horse analogy for the Critical
> Education is evidence of  the collectively formulated knowledge that is
> generously shared, rendering the commodified "scientific"  knowledge
> accessible to the privileged few, generously shared to all who needs to
> advance the survival of humanity.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Simangele
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On
> Behalf Of *Andy Blunden
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 24 June 2020 03:37
> *To:* xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>
>
>
> Casting collective efforts at self-determination as "victim mentality" or
> "self pity" has long been a line of right-wing criticism of progressive
> movements. Of all people, Paulo Freire is the last to be guilty of such a
> sin though; his pedagogy is aimed specifically, like Myles Horton's, at
> stimulating and equipping people from being victims to self-determination.
> There is such a thing as a politics of pity though; it is called
> philanthropy and charity.
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------
>
> *Andy Blunden*
> Hegel for Social Movements
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fnam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com*2F*3Furl*3Dhttps*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fbrill.com*2Fview*2Ftitle*2F54574__*3B!!Mih3wA!WCK45j6Y4AscTY1OVN1quxD0_VDKtR1Y9u5SYoUgfTIzhGpvyRCeU6XnFqBCRESHVrtCaw*24*26data*3D02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C3980c805ddde48ffcda308d81ce02bb5*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291096420282275*26sdata*3DoX74*2BlINhl3MWMlwht3oCw5PTrjXyxOQX17*2BfVvxpf8*3D*26reserved*3D0__*3BJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!Mih3wA!XgF09Z_7Jf5M7eawhdePrcY6Ga6UVHH-Wen9Vq7UBXWfzeFgYdOg20ED5HIi0LW-P86LBA*24&data=02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C793f465e2c064597a6ec08d81d52307d*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291586126480974&sdata=IkuUm91U9GMwiGxaDJXhs8w5QnwrCsBLNDtBPb0z6pA*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUqKioqKioqKioqKiolJSoqKioqKioqJSUqKiolJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!Mih3wA!WBb97M0rnCTuW6rx_rhYvkAPQLCK1TlHV1j2_71whs8hUwhp1NiF5m7opU1Tv5BzBwex0g$>
> Home Page
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fnam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com*2F*3Furl*3Dhttps*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.ethicalpolitics.org*2Fablunden*2Findex.htm__*3B!!Mih3wA!WCK45j6Y4AscTY1OVN1quxD0_VDKtR1Y9u5SYoUgfTIzhGpvyRCeU6XnFqBCREQ2rLbDLg*24*26data*3D02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C3980c805ddde48ffcda308d81ce02bb5*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291096420282275*26sdata*3D97yLyLrH0AJ5QXEU2RAXGWLVxXa6i54MPGgfam6vXFI*3D*26reserved*3D0__*3BJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!Mih3wA!XgF09Z_7Jf5M7eawhdePrcY6Ga6UVHH-Wen9Vq7UBXWfzeFgYdOg20ED5HIi0LU90iyCdw*24&data=02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C793f465e2c064597a6ec08d81d52307d*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291586126490969&sdata=NqHc8uV*2BR9b3*2BpgP4CeIG*2F8x8fTkOajO08luWCkeAzo*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUqKioqKioqKioqKiUlKioqKioqKiolJSolJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!Mih3wA!WBb97M0rnCTuW6rx_rhYvkAPQLCK1TlHV1j2_71whs8hUwhp1NiF5m7opU1Tv5Ck5wUnZA$>
>
> On 24/06/2020 9:11 am, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote:
>
> thanks S’ma; among the many philosophy of science scholars who discuss
> what rigorous scientific and scholarship are or can be, your choice—a video
> critiquing critical theory in terms of what Lindsay refers to as “grievance
> studies”–is  indeed surprising and remarkable in the context of this
> conversation!
>
>
>
> In the video, which did not so much touch my small Marxist me (I am not so
> well read so as to know how much of a Marxist I am!), Lindsay mentions
> Paolo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed as an example of “critical social
> justice” books, which he defines as “a codified way to indulge people into
> self pity…”(min. 47:50). He complains that teachers are being educated with
> Freire’s book, and that students are being taught with this critical (or,
> as Lindsay’s says, this self-pity) attitude. Without going into whether
> Lindsay’s critique holds or has any touch with what critical theory
> scholars argue and do, I wonder, what would be, from Lindsay’s position, an
> example of a good book for teachers, and why would that one be it?
>
>
>
> Alfredo
>
> *From: *<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Martin Packer
> <mpacker@cantab.net> <mpacker@cantab.net>
> *Reply to: *"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 23 June 2020 at 23:54
> *To: *"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>
>
>
> Hi Simangele,
>
>
>
> How are you evaluating “level of mental functioning”? I would say that is
> something with which psychology has had some difficulty.
>
>
>
> 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 Jun 23, 2020, at 4:32 PM, Simangele Mayisela <
> simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za> wrote:
>
>
>
> Further,  I still have more questions, however it does appear to me that
> at the heart of the “hypothesis” of the scientific question are the
> “levels” of mental development which are associated to “skin colour”, with
> little consideration of the historical oppression that created the
> “backwards” economies that keep the third of the global population is what
> appears to be of low level of mental functioning. The question is more
> about “what is the quality of the contents of what is embodies by the black
> skin or a white skin?” with the aim to find evidence for the difference.
>
>
>
> Just to share, lately  have been viewing James Lindsay argument on what is
> “scientific”, “rigorous scientific” and “scholarship”  vs  popular
> narratives that are a propaganda based on Critical Theory, which are taking
> over academy. Here is one his videos that you may want to view – if you are
> Marxist at heart be warned that you may be challenged by Lindsay’s argument
> on ideologies.
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N55gFjg4yg__;!!Mih3wA!X8UcqNF4fpY0GR3Hatw7nXzHDrygqL_xYwaFOYHs5A-SztxKh5QW4Q0NuGt3utcsKD7FWQ$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fnam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com*2F*3Furl*3Dhttps*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.youtube.com*2Fwatch*3Fv*3D8N55gFjg4yg__*3B!!Mih3wA!V2LYI2I2g-qSP--eE84G38eGWBud9YwatVDWX1IvY27YgsR7kTdkqVGDNoLNCYNmswIv-Q*24*26data*3D02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C3980c805ddde48ffcda308d81ce02bb5*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291096420292271*26sdata*3DtYB881hofx2qlKcYHVaGFLwJWbzpFnRD8oRsTDV1y3U*3D*26reserved*3D0__*3BJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!Mih3wA!XgF09Z_7Jf5M7eawhdePrcY6Ga6UVHH-Wen9Vq7UBXWfzeFgYdOg20ED5HIi0LWZEZpvXQ*24&data=02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C793f465e2c064597a6ec08d81d52307d*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291586126490969&sdata=QtplwvBnPbeO8pEDjpsqP1r5VP8rKbh4hV6gmpYUbDE*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUqKioqKioqKioqKiolJSoqKioqKioqJSUqJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!Mih3wA!WBb97M0rnCTuW6rx_rhYvkAPQLCK1TlHV1j2_71whs8hUwhp1NiF5m7opU1Tv5Aaswj01g$>
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> S’ma
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Simangele Mayisela
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 23 June 2020 22:10
> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>
>
>
> Dear Alfredo
>
>
>
> Thank you for taking my attention of “level” which is crucial to rendering
> the question “scientific”. But couple with level, which could be quantifies
> as “high” and “low” or “superior” or “inferior” would account for
> “difference”. As much as the question to be asked should be about the
> “ideological basis” , I think the “hypothesis” is likely to be linked to
> the “ideolody” as the hypothesis serves as springboard from which the
> scientist works from, which informs where the person  will land  in terms
> of the ideas.
>
>
>
> Nevertheless thank you for the clarification. I see what you mean ?
>
> Regards,
>
> S’ma
>
>
>
> --
>
> Crush human humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it
> will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of
> rapacious license and oppression over again, and it will surely yield the
> same fruit, according to its kind.  C.Dickens.
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Cultural Praxis Website: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://culturalpraxis.net__;!!Mih3wA!X8UcqNF4fpY0GR3Hatw7nXzHDrygqL_xYwaFOYHs5A-SztxKh5QW4Q0NuGt3ute21Y8Wmw$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://culturalpraxis.net__;!!Mih3wA!Q_q_DNhDoq1Xzty8Vz0Wuuux1nL8ULgJJJ2-vL13YzNjFRpGelADB-JXAxMUbAotW_H_mw$>
> Re-generating CHAT Website: re-generatingchat.com
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://re-generatingchat.com__;!!Mih3wA!Q_q_DNhDoq1Xzty8Vz0Wuuux1nL8ULgJJJ2-vL13YzNjFRpGelADB-JXAxMUbAoOrejabA$>
> Archival resources website: lchc.ucsd.edu.
> Narrative history of LCHC:  lchcautobio.ucsd.edu.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Crush human humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it
> will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of
> rapacious license and oppression over again, and it will surely yield the
> same fruit, according to its kind.  C.Dickens.
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Cultural Praxis Website: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://culturalpraxis.net__;!!Mih3wA!X8UcqNF4fpY0GR3Hatw7nXzHDrygqL_xYwaFOYHs5A-SztxKh5QW4Q0NuGt3ute21Y8Wmw$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://culturalpraxis.net__;!!Mih3wA!V-mYNb3iJ4MF7rB0hejs8XZr-x47zmuly5qtpqPQPH_4pacZ-MyCn3K8BNOiCivThQbJOQ$>
> Re-generating CHAT Website: re-generatingchat.com
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://re-generatingchat.com__;!!Mih3wA!V-mYNb3iJ4MF7rB0hejs8XZr-x47zmuly5qtpqPQPH_4pacZ-MyCn3K8BNOiCiv56BzdDQ$>
> Archival resources website: lchc.ucsd.edu.
> Narrative history of LCHC:  lchcautobio.ucsd.edu.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Crush human humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it
> will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of
> rapacious license and oppression over again, and it will surely yield the
> same fruit, according to its kind.  C.Dickens.
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Cultural Praxis Website: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://culturalpraxis.net__;!!Mih3wA!X8UcqNF4fpY0GR3Hatw7nXzHDrygqL_xYwaFOYHs5A-SztxKh5QW4Q0NuGt3ute21Y8Wmw$ 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://culturalpraxis.net__;!!Mih3wA!UtoKrfxi3sZ3NjF4DR5th-IZNVsQcMsq_kt9ksl6RVohAkfKsXZvVi4tIZ_i-TFSUyEwFw$>
> Re-generating CHAT Website: re-generatingchat.com
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://re-generatingchat.com__;!!Mih3wA!UtoKrfxi3sZ3NjF4DR5th-IZNVsQcMsq_kt9ksl6RVohAkfKsXZvVi4tIZ_i-TFWAlRbUw$>
> Archival resources website: lchc.ucsd.edu.
> Narrative history of LCHC:  lchcautobio.ucsd.edu.
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20200705/842f55ef/attachment.html