Hi Sarah -
"We are often not conscious of our participation in a
culture as culture."
I am absolutely sure that this is true-in all situations except situations
of dense literacy practice, and those looking at culture as culture.
Certainly, I have found in monocultural situations that this consciousness
is just about absent; or else when it discovered that others do it
differently, indignant outrage (=ethnocentricity) sets in. I have been
located in about 5 cultures and my experience is that the Scottish folk are
the most striking example. I really thinks it help to be a cultural
psychologist who has been brought up in a multicultural situations, because
then nothing has ever been taken for granted.
But can't things like trust-which CAN be brought to awareness, be part of
culture? Does it have to remain in the non-conscious? (Possibly an ignorant
question.)
Carol
Hi Sarah,
Why do shared goals imply consciousness? I think some shared goals can
be quite unconscious, specially in complex (ideological) societies.
David
Quoting Sarah Woodward Beck <sarah.beck@nyu.edu>:
> I agree with Judy - I would remove trust and shared goals. Trust,
> because it has strong moral connotations that don't seem to belong in
> a basic definition of culture, and Shared Goals because this implies
> a consciousness (of goals) that participants in a culture may not
> possess. We are often not conscious of our participation in a
> culture as culture.
> --Sarah Beck
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Judy Diamondstone <jdiamondstone@clarku.edu>
> Date: Saturday, March 20, 2004 1:57 pm
> Subject: RE: cr&c
>
> > > Establshing shared goals/visions?
> > > trust?
> > > division of labor?
> > > complementarity?
> > >
> > > Which of these things would remove from your own conception of
> > culture?
> > SHAREDness of goals
> > Trust.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Judy
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Mike Cole [mcole@weber.ucsd.edu]
> > > Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 1:38 PM
> > > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > Subject: re: cr&c
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I can see that those working to create activities where
> > > reflective practice
> > > is valued and implemented have good reason not to want to
> substitute
> > > culture into Bill's paragraph. I am, of course, speaking of
> > culture as
> > > (better, from) a particular perspective and it is polysemic.
> > Reflective> practice is also polysemic. Even the word polysemic is
>
> > polysemic.>
> > > However, which of the following things is not characteristic of
>
> > culture> as understood in chat discourse:
> > >
> > > I am also uncomfortable about the substtution as I think
> > collaborative> reflection is a highly specific practice and there
>
> > are some important
> > > principles that givern it including the establishment of a
> shared
> > > vision or
> > > goal, the establishment of trust, division of labor,
> > complementarity, etc.
> > >
> > > Establshing shared goals/visions?
> > > trust?
> > > division of labor?
> > > complementarity?
> > >
> > > Which of these things would remove from your own conception of
> > culture?> mike
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:42:24 PST