Re: [xmca] Abstract to Concrete

[Christine Schweighart <schweighartc@gmail.com>]

Hi Martin,
There are many different meanings of model and purposes of modelling
of course, in science and the arts - but earlier in the thread I was
referring to dual stimulation in Change Laboratory work of modelling
as material dual-stimulation in the way you pick up here. ( That's not
the same thing as  evolving concept- in- practice - but if taken up
the' intellectual riches' become a means of production, as other
material resources).

Modelling is molding too, though such intellectual resources often
seem to last in a period of intervention and then fade away- in
Management Science the more lasting modelling actions tend to be ones
that are identified as 'representing things as they are' and extend
imagination through exploring variables -such as simulation. This
isn't a mainstream recognition of dual-stimulation though - and so it
seems that to articulate , use and recognise such a process takes
considerable 'effort' in intervention.

I also said I liked the illustration of Andy's table example, I was
reading into that  some inscription shaped  from within students' own
desires to carry out their development into the physical spaces they
find themselves inhabiting in being full-time on-campus students, an
incredibly social period yet oriented to finding  'life direction'
recognition and responding to society needs and such. In design not
simulating ( and planning a layout of IT and resources which impose a
model of use, but responding to how intention is expressed and
self-creates 'design' in the process - that process being concept.

This kind of problem is very alive and kicking in universities, where
campus library spaces are being transformed or 'learning-grid' [
lately incorporating 'dance-space' and aesthetic movement  into
building space which also affords intense IT services etc for - inthe
case I'm thinking of-  law student horizons and 'project-work' ]
models reflect that 'germ-cell'  expansion and becoming concrete( did
I use that in a way relates back to Andy's comment, or have I
digressed?)
Christine.

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:
> Andy,
>
> This is the point where I become *completely* baffled by your complex account of concepts, and concepts of concepts. In what possible sense does an oval table "model" collaboration? After all, the linguistic image we are all more familiar with is "round table" not oval. Are you suggesting that people cannot collaborate around a square or rectangular table? That people seated around an oval table inevitably collaborate? Somewhere in this thread modeling has been described as the explaining of a problematic situation and offering a perspective for resolving and transforming it. Important, no doubt, but to attribute all this to a table seems, shall we say, implausible.
>
> Martin
>
> On Nov 20, 2012, at 3:11 AM, Andy Blunden wrote:
>
>>  It was a year after we first built the spaces with oval tables before we realised that an oval table "models" collaboration around texts, and is found in student flats where students meet to study together as well as in corporate board rooms.
>
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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