Re: [xmca] Space, neighbourhood, dwelling in, in*formation as notions with a "family resemblance"

[mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>]

I'll what I can find re Zinchenko, Larry. My tendency is to put them up on
the papers-for-discussion page at xmca rather than send them out as a mass
mailing. A couple of the recent posted articles might be lodged there as
well.

I do not think that Zinchenko failed to engage the issue of subjectivity. it
is there in his earliest works, but barely visible. I think what has changed
are the conditions for written discussion of such issues in relationship to
reigning ideologies and opportunities to earn a living.

mike
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Christine, Mike, Ivan,  Tony and others exploring the dialectical
> interweaving [spiralling] of the concepts of "moving fluidity", "e-motion",
> "artifacticity", "sedimentation" "concepts as historically developed ways of
> life" "in*formation" etc.
>
> Mike, I would suggest that bringing back emotion [possibly through the
> concept of moving fluidity] is one line of concepts which must be
> interweaved [as con-text] into the dialogue.
> I'm wondering if you have an archived article by Zinchenko that could begin
> this line of inquiry.
>
> How "fluidity of movement as ecology of life" and "artifacts" as sedimented
> structures or forms  [ "open" boundaries contrasted with "contained"
> boundaries] seems to be an evolving topic.
>
> "Matter" [in both senses of matter "as form" and as "mattering
> connections"]  is a recurring theme I'm grappling with in trying to grasp
> these key concepts.
>
> In particular the noton of "subjectification" as NECESSARY for the
> development of a "sense" of subjectivity or center of consciousness. Then we
> get into what is "center" in space?  Ivan your bringing in Jay Lemke's
> exploration of "parts and wholes" was very helpful.  Andy's notion of
> "concepts" as "materiality" [in the sense of interconnections not essences
> that are HISTORICALLY developed as social formations] is also intriguing.
>
> Mike, if Zinchenko, Anna Stetsenko, Rey, and others in the CHAT tradition
> are re-engaging with notions of "subjectivity" this may be an approach that
> can also bridge back to action research as Christine discusses in the other
> current post.  It seems ISCAR [the book on Vygotsky in the 21st century and
> the seminar] is also grappling with this issue within the tradition of CHT
> [and CHAT?]
>
> What do others think
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:03 PM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That is a whole lot to take in, Christine, over even to hold still for
>> contemplation!
>>
>> One underlying intuition that seemed to be consistent across your example
>> thinkers and ideas we that of fluidity, of living movement. This put me
>> very
>> much in mind of
>> Vladimir P. Zinchenko. VPZ sites various russian scholars including
>> Nicholas
>> Bernshtein, who come up with ideas such as "living movement." Bernshtein
>> is
>> said to have likened living movement to a spiders web waving in the
>> breeze.
>>
>> there is an issue of journal of russian and east european psych coming out
>> with several of VPZ's ideas. I'll keep an eye out for it.
>>
>> mike
>>
>> PS- re fluidity, you get this kind of statement from Ingold:
>>
>> an organism can be thought of as "a flow of material substance in a space
>> that is topologically fluid. I conclude that the organism (animal or
>> human)
>> should be understood not as a bounded entity surrounded by an environment
>> but as an unbounded entanglement of lines in fluid space. (p. 64)
>>
>> Is this a move back from digital models of organic life to analogue? Is it
>> needed to
>> give us a way to include emotions in our accounts of cognitive processes?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 8:27 AM, christine schweighart <
>> schweighartgate@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Hi Ivan,
>> >  I'm afraid that is a rather multi-faceted endeavour -   it would be
>> 'more
>> > than passing interest' ( as Mike in  the to Swinburne 'design' thread
>> > orients to) - but here this hasn't yet been attempted in a thorough
>> > scholarly way with depth of engagement in the very diverse themes in
>> CHAT
>> > traditions, and using an explication consistent with this form of
>> biological
>> > perspective. ( An interest that  would refine using inclusional
>> ontology, in
>> > reframing with reference to those traditions.)
>> >
>> > I can only share my own experience of sticking points where each finds
>> > issue with the others' discourse, at most, but it's difficult to
>> 'pitch'.  I
>> > mentioned Maturana and I first tried to examine commonalities and areas
>> > where each adds to the other in a paper this summer - I can send an
>> extract
>> > if you wish. I found that  these ideas were invited for examination
>> amongst
>> > members of the systems community - however  a biological perspective to
>> be
>> > difficult 'subject matter'  to attract or engage interest amongst  AT
>> > researchers ( another long story).  What Rayner's contribution offers to
>> > this is an ontology which is dynamic and relational.
>> >
>> > This current discussion through Tony's observation of   'shared
>> experience'
>> > as  'experience in which
>> > the experience of others participates in the experience of any one, in
>> the
>> > course of the experiencing.' Might have brought out a place for
>> rethinking
>> > the somatic and has a lot to do with 'energy' as well as perception
>> mediated
>> > through the nervous system. However the biological knowledge of this
>> kind of
>> > catalysis in the body is over-shadowed by the neurological as if it was
>> the
>> > only 'system' in the body - not contigous with others in dynamics that
>> we
>> > have insufficient direct knowledge about .
>> > I liked Elinor Ochs petition at ISCAR as it acknowledged that we don't
>> have
>> > a grasp of how to study the watershed of experience spanning this living
>> > dynamic.  ( Indexical meaning 'arcs' towards a place where meaning can
>> begin
>> > to form' and that in actuality awareness of the living moment is
>> > never complete.
>> > Maturana's 'recursions' in languaging relies upon circular closure to
>> work
>> > upon empirical experience against a linear
>> > flow ( such as our notion of time) , a relation which is problematic.
>> > Though he does see that the root of social orientation is emotional and
>> love
>> > for others.  Recurrence has a spiraling
>> > rather than replicable circular form, each recurrence is revealed by a
>> new
>> > capacity –or hidden inner form which affords new learning (which crafts
>> > meanings).
>> >
>> > I am also reminded of the intense discussion of 'concepts' and Jay
>> Lemke's
>> > questions of the extent of  theoretical ground in CHAT  in concept
>> > formation, where some researchers have reached out to Schutz (Marianne
>> > Hedegaard for example). At Lancaster a distinction was made that whilst
>> > Schutz bases his work upon Husserl's distinction between a natural
>> attitude
>> > of 'common sense' belief and the phenomenological attitude in which that
>> > belief is suspended, Husserl regarded the everyday world only as a
>> > preliminary to making the 'phenomenological reduction' [ to 'data of
>> > consciousness'],  it is the everyday 'lived in world' that is Schutz's
>> main
>> > concern - ie more sociologist that phenomenologist wanting to analyse
>> the
>> > 'nature of structures which are taken as given'. It is this attitude
>> that is
>> > frustrated by 'incompleteness', as that which is prevailing 'in the
>> moment'
>> > as living isn't purely rational, of course, it is embodied- the analytic
>> > separation of emotion and isolation towards considering rationality in
>> > concept formation is problematic. Imagination, as a phenomenon, goes
>> beyond
>> > emotion though - and articulates through hope ( of course when I say
>> this
>> > I'm drawing on a concept of hope, not the feeling in any living moment).
>> >
>> > Perhaps it's in this that  Bruce's comment about Lefebvre's terms
>>  brings
>> > out a place for Alan Rayner's space as presence of 'receptivity' ?
>> > - to go back to the observation:-
>> >  ' the presence or absence of a social space - not necessarily physical
>> > proximity but a medium through which an acting collectivity can form.'
>> > and a quote from Alan Rayner's paper on  analysis using ideas of
>> > completeness which he drew from understanding boundaries in the study of
>> > fungii
>> >
>> >
>> > "The very idea of complete ‘whole units’ existing anywhere, at any scale
>> in
>> > Nature as an energetically
>> > open, fluid system does not make sense. The fluidly variable
>> connectivity
>> > of natural
>> >
>> > inclusionality arises from the coming together
>> > (contiguity/inter-connectivity), fusion (confluence/intra-connectivity)
>> and
>> > dissociation
>> > (individuation/differentiation) of energetic paths, corridors or
>> channels
>> > of included space in
>> > labyrinthine branching
>> > systems and networks"Where networks are not constituted as connected
>> nodes,
>> > but are dynamic in a process of relational networking. Maturana's
>> position
>> > was that we are 'social' through orientation  lead by emotion - our
>> 'doing'
>> > arises through 'for others' first ( another rich strand in activity
>> > theoretical work).
>> >
>> > This messy complex ( that might seem quite ambiguous -  as these
>> discourses
>> > are terms and terms apart)  is why I wanted to express an interest - but
>> > didn't have a sense of how to make a contribution that would make s
>> > difference!
>> > Christine.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >  __________________________________________
>> > _____
>> > xmca mailing list
>> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>> >
>> __________________________________________
>> _____
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>
>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca