Re: [xmca] concept

[ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org]

Michael & Andy, Steve & lurkers:

This is an extremely interesting conversation pertaining to the kernel of 
human development. 

Getting back to the example of water freezing.  If a child is making 
kool-aid and takes ice cubes out of the freezer and then puts water in the 
ice cube tray to make more ice his actions are based upon the 'concept' of 
water freezing.  Michael; I, like Andy, see no words used in the child 
freezing water but rather an activity that revolves around a socialized 
more of making ice cubes.

However, I can also examine within the history of human development the 
imprinting of natural occurences within the human experience.  These 
natural occurences do not begin in the word and are indeed separate from 
the word.  The influences vary from dances and song to the burning of 
insence, etc

Is there room?

What do lurkers think?

What do lurkers do?

eric




Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
10/28/2009 08:46 AM
Please respond to ablunden; Please respond to "eXtended Mind, Culture, 
Activity"

 
        To:     "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: [xmca] concept


I don't think you can describe people and their action as 
"attachments" of a word, Michael.
What do you mean by "soul"?

Andy

Wolff-Michael Roth wrote:
> It is precisely the limitations of this theory of concepts as words that 

> we have tried to deal with in the piece I recently shared the reference 
> to. Concepts cannot be words with attachments, or you are in the same 
> waters as with the concept of meaning. What about the concept of 
> concept? What about the meaning of concept? And the concept of meaning? 
> How come you privilege words, which really denote material patterns 
> (scratches and traces in some medium, sound patterns).
> I think it would be worthwhile to pick up in Derrida and his analysis 
> and critique of language, that begins with looking at the ancient Greek 
> thoughts about how the soul gets imprinted from nature, and the soul 
> then is expressed in the voice, and the voice gets doubled in writing. 
> It is this chain, which begins with an imprint of nature in the soul 
> that metaphysics is concerned, and I am afraid that all writing about 
> concepts and meaning are but further metaphysical efforts.
> Michael
> 
> 
> On 2009-10-28, at 4:20 AM, Steve Gabosch wrote:
> 
> You've packed a lot of ideas in a few sentences, Andy!  Saying that 
> concepts are words that are associated with systems of actions makes 
> sense to me in that it links word-meaning with human action.  But you 
> say next that a concept is "the basic unit of the life of some system of 

> practice."   Could you clarify a little?  Just trying to follow your 
> thinking here ...
> 
> - Steve
> 
> 
> On Oct 27, 2009, at 6:15 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
> 
>> Eric,
>>
>> Ultimately, a concept is a word associated with some system of actions 
>> and known to some individual(s). The word is a sign for the concept, 
>> and a concept is the basic unit of the life of some system of practice.
>>
>> A concept must be distinguished from the properties or attributes of a 
>> thing. The list of something's attributes is not a concept of the 
>> thing. A true concept is independent of the attributes of any thing 
>> and indicates some innovation in a system of practice to overcome some 
>> problem which arose in the development of the relevant social 
formation.
>>
>> But thinking in concepts requires both sensuous perception of the 
>> attibutes of things and the (true) concepts of the things. Perception 
>> of the attributes of things is called a "pseudoconcept" in the CHAT 
>> tradition. Real, genuinely conscious human activity is the unity of a 
>> true concept and a pseudoconcept.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
>>> Hello all:
>>> Recent discussions have caused me to ponder the "concept of 
>>> concept".  It is not merely a property that something posseses; for 
>>> water certainly contains hydrogen and oxygen regardless of whether it 
>>> is labeled as such. However; if I am learning about water than I am 
>>> provided the opportunity to observe and experiment with the 
>>> properties water exhibits/contains.  At zero degrees celsius the 
>>> water freezes, at one hundred degrees celsius it boils.  Again these 
>>> are properties but as I am learning about them do they become 
>>> concepts?  That liquids freeze and boil.  Is answering these 
>>> questions on a science quiz enough to claim a student can 
>>> conceptualize boiling and freezing?  I believe LSV would answer no. 
>>> So then back to the blocks experiment and what precisely was LSV 
>>> proposing about the development of concepts?
>>> eric
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>> -- 
>> 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
>> Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov, Ilyenkov 
>> $20 ea
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> 

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov, 
Ilyenkov $20 ea

_______________________________________________
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