Re: [xmca] agency redefined

hi Martin, it may be dichotomous for some but not for many others,
like Sewell. I don't know how one can think dichotomously and claim
to think in terms of dialectic. Dichotomies are not part of
dialectics, unless you think in these terms: The one-sided
expressions, external to the thing itself, stand in a dichotomous
relation, like wave and particle concerning light. BUt in dialectics,
you think in terms of moments, and not in terms of elements, a slip
up even of Yrjö's, and the term moment I discovered only this week, a
term I have been using for a while because of my German dialectical
training, is also used by ANL. For myself, I tend to think in these
terms along the lines of ANL, who sees in meaning a process back and
forth between two other processes, thinking and speaking, both only
moments of a more encompassing process, communicating.
Cheers,
Michael

On 16-Mar-08, at 3:32 PM, Martin Packer wrote:

Hi Michael,

Latour seems to want to avoid the agency/structure dialectic (or perhaps
offer his account of it) by viewing agency as in part an activity of
structuring. Structures for him are always contingent achievements,
assembled and maintained. Much sociology, in my reading as in his, is in
contrast stuck in a *dichotomy* of agency versus structure (and
consequently
micro/macro).

You say that passivity is how the world pushes back at us. But surely
the
world frequently does more than push back. When I catch the flu the
world
takes a shot at putting an end to me, by means of an agency that has no
consciousness at all.

Martin

On 3/16/08 2:13 PM, "Wolff-Michael Roth" <mroth@uvic.ca> wrote:

> Hi Martin, Heidi:
> talking about agency without also talking about structure makes no
> sense, because structure enables and is revealed in agency, which
> mobilizes structures, but can do only because it is structured
> itself. In sociology, you get the agency|structure dialectic, where
> structure captures another dialectic, that of material resources|
> schema. Somewhere I make the argument that this is not sufficient and
> that we need to think in terms of a triple dialectic each of
> processual character:
>
> agency|passivity||resources|schema
>
> When you closely analyze, then you will see that it no longer makes
> any sense to speak about inside outside dichotomy, but
> simultaneously, it forces you to think differently about Latour's
> agency, which is something different, but which is captured in the
> passivity moment in my model. Passivity captures how the world pushes
> back at us, affects us, when we act toward it. Think about touching,
> you may intend to learn about something through touching it, but at
> the same time you have to open yourself up to be touched b y the
> world, which leaves impressions in/on your body, that actually lead
> to sensation, the first important moment in ANL's theory of
> consciousness.
>
> Latour does not talk about consciousness, which cannot be thought
> independent of the world, to which it stands in an irreducible and
> constitutive relationship. That is why his agency is different from
> CHAT agency, or sociological agency. :-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> On 16-Mar-08, at 10:38 AM, Martin Packer wrote:
>
> Heidi,
>
> The excerpts from Activity, Consciousness, Personality are very
> interesting.
> I must confess, though, that I get confused when Leontiev writes in
> these
> terms: of the "subjective image" as a "reflection of reality." To
> western
> ears/eyes it is very easy to assimilate this to the model of
> knowledge/perception as a matter of mental representations. Bakhurst
> has a
> good discussion of the notion of 'reflection' in Vygotsky, Leontiev,
> Lenin
> et al., but I don't have it to hand. What are the connotations of the
> term
> in Russian?
>
> By the way, Latour agrees with you that humans have a capacity for
> consciousness that objects do not. But he still argues that objects
> (microbes, polypeptides, transportation systems) have much more of a
> variety
> of forms of agency than we usually give them credit for.
>
> Martin
>
> On 3/15/08 1:01 AM, "varnam soupend" <heidizulfai@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Luiz , Bruce , Martin ,
>> For the past several nights , I 've not been able to use the
>> Internet ; I
>> had , therefore , to put my message in word format and now have to
>> send it as
>> an attachment . My apologies for the inconvenience !
>> Heidi
>> heidizulfai@yahoo.com
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
>> Try it
>> now.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Sun Mar 16 16:21 PDT 2008