Re: [xmca] CHAT: Interdisciplinary or maybe TRANS-disciplinary?

[Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>]

It seemed to me that rather than getting scholars from other 
disciplines "on board", what is necessary is our own 
boarding party. We need to enter the discourse in other 
disciplines, e.g., in their journals and at their 
conferences, and critique their work, and draw out the need 
for CHAT ideas from that critique.

I have tried. I am from outside CHAT anyway, so I should be 
able to. But so far I have failed. But I labour under other 
disadvantages as I am outside academia altogether and 
getting heard inside CHAT (if it weren't for Mike/xmca) is 
hard enough let alone at Critical Theory or Hegel Society 
conferences, etc.

But I think some of us who do have academic skills, if 
people were to take a break and submit papers critiquing 
(for example) social theorists, in their own language in 
their own journals, then CHAT ideas would be taken seriously.

Andy

Bruce Robinson wrote:
> > I think it is pretty widely stated that cultural historical activity 
> > theory
> > or socio-cultural historical practice theory or ..........
> > is what is ordinarily conceived of as an inter-disciplinary undertaking
> > that
> > spans at least social sciences and humanities, with
> > some arts and evolutionary biology thrown in from time to time (and even,
> > gulp, some math).
>
> Don't forget information systems which has a reasonable corpus of CHAT 
> work.
> Or perhaps more generally socio-techn[olog]ical studies should also be
> included.
>
> > Andy has been using the term interdisciplinary in trying to get us to
> > think
> > of projects as a basic unit of analysis while some
> > resist the idea of *A SINGLE* unit of analysis that spans all concerns of
> > this ryzhomic enterprise.
> >
> > And despite the talk of interdisciplinarity, we seem to be pretty heavily
> > centered in psychology and education, with only
> > some attention to work.
> > Might we need to think seriously about a TRANS-discipline where
> > integration
> > across levels of time and syncrhonic variation
> > are included? Or must we always be piecemeal, able to cope with 2-3
> > dimensions/aspects of our problematic, but unable
> > to move to the integrative level that our own theories tell us we need?
>
> On a transdiscipline: Definitely. This integration is implicit in the 
> fundamental conceptions of CHAT IMHO.
>
> Don't forget space either. It seems to have been rather under-theorised 
> in CHAT from what I can see and there seem to be some interesting 
> possible crossovers. Plus a group of radical geographers who might be 
> interested.
>
> Bruce R
>
>
>
> > Last thought/question of the evening.
> > mike
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.8/2086 - Release Date: 04/29/09
> 06:37:00
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy/
Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden:
From Erythrós Press and Media <http://www.erythrospress.com/>.

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca