Eugene,
Have you ever read Dewey, he resonated for some reason when I read your
message.
Nate
-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Matusov [mailto:ematusov@UDel.Edu]
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 10:47 AM
To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
Subject: RE: A question to Eugene about progress in postmodern era
Hi Genevieve and everybody--
In short, I suggest that the notions of progress and development can be
"saved" in the postmodern and social constructivism reigns via emphasizing
their social (and cultural, and historical, and political, and economic, and
aesthetic, and ...) constructionist nature. Both notions are based on
implicit recognition of what is good -- progress is a transformation of
object in a desired direction. It is almost like the notion of goal but
without full ownership of the change by the actor -- the change has an
emergent character.
Let's make values behind the desirability explicit, which relationally means
shifting from imposition of one's own values on others to invitation for
collaboration with involved others to develop shared values. Asking
questions like why is this direction of changes good, good for whom, good at
whose and at what expense, what are limits of this good, and so forth will
allow not only deconstruct the notions of progress and development but
reconstruct them to make them negotiable, relativist, subjective-objective,
sociocultural, critical, and collaborative.
Sounds like a new utopia? Well, nobody promises a success in this endeavor.
Its possible failure (of collaboration of the involved parties) will be a
"new failure" in a sense that it will be a failure to collaborate about
developing shared values of good with others and not a failure to impose
values of one's own good on others as it was/is in traditional definitions
of the notions of progress and development. The analysis of the failure to
define progress in a given situation can be very informative about
sociocultural and political contexts of each specific situation. For
example, currently we have a failure to define a progress in race relations
in the US exactly because we fail to collaborate on shared values of what is
good. I personally prefer the "new type of failure" because it is more
transparent about social relations than the old one.
I think it can be useful to apply these new postmodern notions of progress
and development to the practical issues of accountability and sustainability
of innovative projects of (re)froming existing/new institutions (like, for
example, 5th Dim).
What do you think?
Eugene
> -----Original Message-----
> From: genevieve patthey-chavez [mailto:ggpcinla@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 6:45 PM
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: A question to Eugene
>
>
>
>
> Hello Eugene, I have a question for you.
>
> You write:
>
> However, I think that the notion of progress perhaps
> can be rehabilitated within post-modern and social
> constructivism approaches.
>
> The question: How?
>
> I realize the answer may be a) already on the list,
> and b) a little long to just drop in a quick email.
> I'll be happy with a few pointers ...
>
> Genevieve
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 17:54:00 PST