As part of his meditations on Mike Rose's paper, Phil wrote:
However it seems to me that while Rose elegantly crosses the boundaries
between working class (waitressing) America and middle class (academic)
America, he fails to transcend America itself. Hence he is led into
unexamined assumptions about the mediating effect of the culturally
instantiated practice of tipping. Yrjo works in both Finland and America. I
would love to see him address this topic. Mike Cole addresses these matters
tangentially in his report on the Velikhov-Hamburg Project, but I am not
aware of his specifically addressing the issue of the cultural mediation of
the way in which a researcher makes sense of research data on social
systems.
Several items interested me here. First, I didn't personally conclude that
Mike R failed to examine his claims about the mediating function of tipping
for the case he analyzed. He is not an email user, but perhaps these comments
on xmca will find their way to him and we might hear his views. Rather, I
took his dicussion to be descriptive of the case he analyzed. As it turns out,
I grew up in the general geocultural surroundings of that case, and the
story rang true for me. I did not even think of analyzing it for its generality
to other cases/places. Not that this is not an interesting question. phil's
comments, and diane's make that clear enough.
"the cultural mediation of the way in which a researcher makes sense of research
data on social systems" is the issue laid directly on my doorstep, so I'll say
a few words about it.
First, I would generalize the issue. Its not just the question of making sense
of research in relation to one's own and another culture, but the very idea
of what constitutes a question for research, the meaning of the observations
and analytic categories that are put into play to generate "the data" that have
to be called into question.
In my work I have worried about this issue in several ways.
First, I came to be deeply suspicious of the lenses through which my colleagues
and I posed questions about culture and cognitive development during my work
in Liberia and Yucatan. I think these issues are discussed in several publications including *Cultural Psychology* but there is much that could be expanded
on.
I would need guidance on where to take the conversation.
In my work in the U.S. since the early 1970's I have very explicitly worried
about methodologies which put the assumptions to academic research at risk. So,
for example, research conducted by members of LCHC in minority group communities
were conducted by researchers from those communities, and wherever possible,
we conducted "cross-over" experiments, where the ethnicity and contents of
experimental procedures were constructed separately for each community and
run in both in order to assess the cultural blinders we all acquire in the
process of development.
In the early 1980's when minority group researchers were forced out of LCHC
by the masters of benign neglect, I moved my research base to the town I
live in where I occupy the role of local citizen and university geek
simultaneously, affording me a kind of double vision I see as essential
to all social science research.
As to my work for many years working with Russian psychologists and commuting
to Moscow, my major conclusion has been that I simply do not understand enough
about Russian culture (although I know a lot more about it than about Kpelle
or Yucatec Maya cultures, to be sure) to be able to hope for more than the
opportunity to be constantly surprised by demonstrations that my conclusions
concerning some social phenomenon are seen completely differently by my
Russian colleagues.
With respect to our Newsletter, reborn as MCA, I have always sought to
represent as many voices as possible, believing that only in a truly
international polylog do I have a snowball's chance in hell of discovering
anything important about culture in development, the focus of my inquiry.
Hence my satisfaction that the center of control of MCA moves across the
Atlantic this month and my hope that in a few years perhaps it will cross
the Pacific as well. Hence my suggestion for the AERA ch-sig that we discuss
the globalization of cultural-historical approaches to human nature, a
suggestion which the membership did not find especially appealing.
Is any of this sufficient. Of course not. We are stuck with English in this
forum, for one glaring example.
But the intention and actions have been clear in indicating that I thoroughly
agree with the need for critical cultural analysis of what we call our research
and how we interpret what others call their research. My main response to those
who think the job is being done poorly is to put their time and energy to
work doing a better job. Its an effort I am always ready to join.
mike
PS-- Exactly 10 years ago today, the USSR began to experience the eruption that
would lead to its demise. Remember?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 01 2001 - 01:02:12 PDT