Andy,
[[you ask if it is what we "make" of an experience that is determinative
if it
is "vital". I would suggest that the term how we "participate" rather
than
"make" is central to exploring "vital experience". Making is one
particular
approach to engaging vital experience. This is a vital experience that
transforms the individual person's orientation within the world. This is
an
agentive response that has the quality of being a "personal" decision. I
would like to suggest this is one particular way to intergrate "vital
experience in our proceeding along pathways. I would even suggest this may
be the particular way forward that is biased as an approach within
modernity
as an ethical way of life.
>From this perspective "vital experience" can be personally "undergone"
>and
through struggle and courageously exploring of personal inscapes the
person
can change direction and "make" something different of their lives
[develop] ]]
Dear all
This is part of a message by dear Larry . I've been to this forum for long
. i get confused reading the passage . i ask myself where the reason lies
. one reason might be my ignorance . but that's not all to it . one thing
i think about is we do not take into account the politics of the time . i
don't say this should be a political forumn ; no , but if politics says
who governs , who is governed by , then everything differs . On the whole
, we reached a conclusion that Vygotsky has , at least , a half-glance at
Marxism . The other seven of his disciples , too . Activity Theory has its
roots in Marxism . My experience tells me when discussions approach a
concrete stance , even our weaker ones could make a sense of the
discussion . Four of our dears I can name as exemplars are : Mike , Andy ,
Martin , David . Let's follow their suit .
I should be forgiven if I claim I curse this word "any" . In two articles
, Andy Blunden and Peter Jones , long ago , discussed that by "work" ,
they didn't mean "any" "work" . They and Marx meant "valorization" Process
; the work which creates "value" . It's that "value" --surplus--which is
appropriated by capitalists . Our friends say Freire talks about
oppression in education but one cannot get the idea how this oppression
could be eliminated . Within capitalism or outside of it ? and if outside
of it , how and by what means ? Being at it , one good researcher Julian
Williams , using the content of Lave and McDermott's article of 2002 , had
her debate on comparing Labour alianation and educational education . This
good Lady referred us to a response Peter Jones had had to her article .
Everybody were silent about this important matter .
[[I would suggest that the term how we "participate" rather than
"make" is central to exploring "vital experience".]]
If I claim that I want to go further than "individual" or "persoanl" ,
what could be my today's "vital experience" ? I'm wrong if I say ? : the
recession in the capitalist world , the hasty William Hague who wants to
put an end to every bitter taste in the impoverished , oppressed ,
backward Middle East so that His treasury might not get exausted sooner
and earlier than predicted and to this end even people's lives are not
important for Him , the Air Bombardments of the Evil Nato , the natural
and social mishaps quite afresh to the mouths of our noble westerners ?
Then where do you want to participate ? and in what ? did you join the
demonstrations in the American streets for the quite genuine serious class
differentiations / exploitation ? Here people are killed when they
demonstrate but that's not for you there .
[[This is a vital experience that
transforms the individual person's orientation within the world.]]
I think and you know for certain that this is not the "any" individual who
is orientated within the world . It is , you say more emphatically than I
do , the COLLECTIVIZED individual person , all along with His co-partners
of the same rank and class , who are orientated and then are destined to
enter battling with the not yet transformed ?? world of oppression ,
genocide , slaughter and cruelty . An individual does not sleep one
especial night and does not awake the next day with social justice at her
bosom . Transformations WITHIN requires a calling on the WITHOUT . How is
it that a new-born needs socialization but adults could live on her own ,
agentively as you say or at most with the dead experiences internalized
and , true , if vital , ones need be , where should we be orientated /
stationed so that "vitality" could be secured and gauranteed ?
[[This is an
agentive response that has the quality of being a "personal" decision.]]
I seek your forgiveness if I say this yet smacks of a "gone with the wind
only not to return" world of capitalistic struggle against feudalism ,
fraternity , equality and ... . This means "individual" decision not
"personal" decision in the sense of Vygotsky and Leontyev's "SENSE" . I
remember Leontyev somewhere saying : an instinct of hunger just raises the
animal to its feet , the rest remains for her to orientate within the
surrounding and environment . you need a decent life ; then in the social
milieu , the environment , the objective field , the object world , many
things are located and contiguous . You have to choose one / some to
satisfy your need . That thing or things becomes/become the "motive" of
the activity you're going to fulfill . You've , then , gone to a world of
decision making , agency as you remind us of . An exploiter seeks an
instrument of murder ; an exploited seeks a means of emancipation . For
the explited , the general
social meaning of "any" and "every" equality in the AIR has been vanished
.
might continue ...
All the best
Haydi
________________________________
From: Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Thursday, 6 October 2011, 16:25:49
Subject: [xmca] adverbial qualified movement, action, being
The discussion of vivencia has me pondering
The turn to discussing "vital experience" or being as qualified being [not
qualia] seems to be an opening with potential and possibility.
Andy,
you ask if it is what we "make" of an experience that is determinative if
it
is "vital". I would suggest that the term how we "participate" rather
than
"make" is central to exploring "vital experience". Making is one
particular
approach to engaging vital experience. This is a vital experience that
transforms the individual person's orientation within the world. This is
an
agentive response that has the quality of being a "personal" decision. I
would like to suggest this is one particular way to intergrate "vital
experience in our proceeding along pathways. I would even suggest this may
be the particular way forward that is biased as an approach within
modernity
as an ethical way of life.
>From this perspective "vital experience" can be personally "undergone"
>and
through struggle and courageously exploring of personal inscapes the
person
can change direction and "make" something different of their lives
[develop]
However, alternatively, the person could possibly be "met" [alterity] and
in this "I-YOU" meeting "vital experience" is transformed and new pathways
open. I wonder if this alternative way of engaging "vital experience" is
through "witnessing" [as I explored recently] This is another way of
engaging "vital experience" that does not emphasize the personal
courageous
aspect of transformation [as making] but rather points to "being met"
within
the "vital experience".
I've contrasted and made distinct two possible openings of development
[transformation or in*formation] One emphasing a journey through
inscapes,
the other through intersubjective "holding environments". In actuality
there
may be multiple flow-forms and interweavings of these multiple strands of
"vital experience" What I'm pointing to is our socio-cultural biases in
modernity to validate the "inscapes" as legitimate [good] pathways of
transformation while invalidating the inter-subjective witnessing pathways
to transformation. [as dependency and defended against] In other words we
don't really "trust" the other will actually respond to the calling of
"vial
experience".
Andy, I grant that after being "met" [which I believe may be developmental
in its own movement] there follow other phases or levels of transformation
that bring us back to "spaces of reason" "propositional language games"
"agentive stances of *making* ones way in the world", etc.
This becomes a cultural-historical narrative of projects and objects and
activity. I also grant "meeting" as I'm discussing it is "normative" and
an
ethical stance towards alterity [including one's own alterity]. However
as
a particular form of participation it may have as much validity and
legitimacy as the moe courageous form of turning towards inscapes for
transormation.
Larry
__________________________________________
_____
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