Hi Eugene,
Your post points squarely at what I see as key dilemma of social science
today - sorting out the problems and limitations of both objectivism and
subjectivism. In creating a social science that can adequately comprehend
our modern world, the challenge is to find a way to both master the
"ready-made science" of industry and technology while also leading the
development of "science-in-action" as new ideas and new waves of people
begin to wield the powerful tools of knowledge and apply science to life -
apply science "in-action". We are in the midst of an exciting historic
process.
Eugene, you present many provocative arguments against one-sided
objectivism and advocate what I find to be a very refreshing look at
subjectivism. I think you bring up very important and worthy discussion.
In my opinion, the Gutierrez/Rogoff article "Cultural Ways of Learning:
Individual Traits or Repertoires of Practice" by Kris D. Gutiérrez and
Barbara Rogoff
did a terrific job of critiquing a very important form that one-sided
objectivism takes in education today, where learning styles are linked to
ethnicity in a mechanical and stereotypical way. Their article showed how
the attribution of cultural traits to individuals had the consequence of
denying the subjective - of denying the individuality of a student - by
assuming that learning styles are traits. This is part of a larger
paradigm that holds that a cultural group is comprised of individuals with
certain traits. They deconstruct this assumption and advocate in its place
the idea that learning styles are repertoires adopted from experience.
The core question of whether culture is an objective phenomena or a
dialogic social construction is tricky in my opinion because both answers
are false if posed one-sidedly. Culture cannot be a strictly objective
phenomena - subjectivity is an essential feature of human culture. On the
other hand, it cannot be just words and mental constructions - for human
society grows out of and is comprised of objective material nature. The
challenge is to create a social science that can hold and develop the truth
in both these approaches. I like the dialogue you are stirring up over
this question, good things will come out of it.
What do you think?
- Steve
10/26/03 -0500, Eugene wrote:
>Dear Steve–
> <snip>
>The core of our discussion with her seems to be that we may disagree about
>the notion of culture that Barbara seems to treat as an objective
>phenomenon while I treat it as a social construction and dialogic event.
<snip>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Nov 01 2003 - 01:00:08 PST