Re: FW: [xmca] bodies and artifacts

[Larry Purss <lpurss@shaw.ca>]

Hi Mike 
(and everyone else contributing to the discussion on bodies, artifacts, biocultural processes emotion)
I wanted to draw people's attention to the article "The parent-infant dyad and the construction of the subjective self" by Peter Fonagy, George Gergely and Mary Target. (2007)
The article gives a detailed summary of current neuroscience studies of brain- social interactions and correspondences.  It is written in a style that is hard to follow without a biological background but does cover most of the territory and offers a detaile bibliography for exploring specific topics further. It does highlight the INTERPRETIVE muddles that accompany the "facts" of brain localized studies.
 
The most interesting section of the article is the summary of  theoretical speculations on the centrality of teaching and pedagogy to the basic development of  "mentalization" (I prefer the term "reflective function" as mentalization carries dangers of the Cartesian paradigm.).
On page 307 the authors contrast two challenges for human infants:
1) the social world. Children have to develop an understanding of minds to be able to predict and interpret people's actions in terms of causal mental states attributed to others and as part of this process ACQUIRE AN AGENTIVE SENSE OF SELF (that could be another thread of discussion on CHAT)
 
2) human culture. Infants need to acquire an immense amount of cultural knowledge that involves arbitrary features of of social belief systems and complex cultural artifacts that each member of a community has to learn to use.
 
The authors point out that theories of self and social cognitive development have tended to focus on the first challenge.
 
The author's coin the term "Theory of Human Pedagogy" to express a new perspective (maybe not so new to CHAT) that incorporates inquiry into BOTH the challenges elaborated above. (Page 308) gives references to further elaborations of their theory mostly by Gergely and Csibra)
 
The article I'm summarizing gives a general orientation to their perspective that views TRIADIC communication (self, other, objects) as foundational to development.
I want to point out a specific and particular subset of their general theory of human pedagogy. It is the fundamental focus on MARKED mirroring of emotion regulation as a social process which leads to internalization.of introspectively accessible SECOND ORDER REPRESENTATIONS of primary automatic emotion-expressive displays.  Marking emotional displays is the teaching process to understand emotions.  It creates the basis for affect-regulation  and impulse control as the primary emotions are represented and therefore "recognized" and "shared" intersubjectively. (Not primary intersubjectivity)
 
MARKEDNESS of the mirroring of affect is the process where the caregiver is able to express a mirrored affect WHILE INDICATING SHE IS NOT EXPRESSING HER OWN EMOTIONS.  The expression is NOT how the caregiver herself feels.  The "marked" affect-mirroring interactions can be interpreted as as a SPECIAL CASE of pedagogical triadic communication. (caregiver, other, and marked affect as objective) which facilitates mentalization or reflective function.
This model presupposes primary emotional states that are NOT MARKED [and trauma, matreatment, and unmarked emotional displays by (m)others] leave emotions primary and unformulated and therefore unregulated)  Developmental models debate what happens to these primary emotions as second order representations and cultural biases develop. I personally believe every culture , family, and primary dyadic caregiver-infant relation leaves some emotions unmarked and therefore unformulated.  Creating "open spaces" or "holding environments" in which these primary emotions have a chance to be marked and reflective functions develop is one perspective on a central role of pedagogy (and possibly therapy)
 
Just a few thoughts.  Marked affect-regulation also speaks to Vygotsky's recognition of play and pretense as cultural spaces to practice marked affect regulation as second order emotional representations are generated in safe uncompetitive peer relations. (but that's another thread)
 
I think this line of thinking is fertile for bridging (or opening spaces BETWEEN)intersubjective and sociocultural discourses.
Got to go to work
 
Larry
 
 
 


----- Original Message -----
From: mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
Date: Monday, December 14, 2009 8:38 am
Subject: Re: FW: [xmca] bodies and artifacts
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>

> Seems like we are all here to learn, Mabel.
> My guess? Practice certainly provides a more encompassing 
> understanding of
> reality, but it, like all human action that is culturally 
> mediated, it is a
> loosely coupled system of heterogeneous elements that each 
> person must
> interpret/imagine for themselves. Is the result "better 
> understanding of
> reality?" As with all things, seems like only time will tell.
> mike
> 
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Mabel Encinas 
> <liliamabel@hotmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > Thank you, Mike.
> > Yes, the reduction to dyadic interaction what worries me, but 
> also, I
> > wonder: does practice involve a more 'realistic' understanding 
> of reality?
> > It is to learn that I am here =)
> > Mabel
> >
> >
> > > Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 09:11:03 -0800
> > > Subject: Re: [xmca] bodies and artifacts
> > > From: lchcmike@gmail.com
> > > To: lpurss@shaw.ca
> > > CC: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >
> > > More later, Larry. I have to complete grading grad papers in 
> history of
> > > communication course (Mabel-- communication outside of 
> cultural practices
> > > seems hard to imagine. I think what you are referring to is 
> views of
> > > communication as dyadic interaction?) There is some great 
> material in on
> > of
> > > the books I used,*Speaking into the air, * that is all about
> > inbetweeness. I
> > > have not read a lot of what you mention, but it is one 
> characteristic of
> > > this discussion group that no one has read everything and 
> knows it, so
> > that
> > > we are constantly learning from each other (although I 
> confess, the
> > > erudition of some of our members blows me over.... ditto the 
> author of
> > > *Speaking
> > > into the air*).
> > >
> > > more to come from all over, I am sure.
> > > mike
> > >
> > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Larry Purss 
> <lpurss@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Mike
> > > > I really appreciate these articles and the process of 
> serendipity once
> > more
> > > > opens up new "spaces'" to explore. I was just settling 
> down to read
> > Martin
> > > > Buber's analysis of the construct BETWEENNESS and had a 
> book by Robert
> > > > Nisbett discussing Vico's perspective on the notion of 
> historical> > > "developmentalism" and "progress" I was thinking 
> of reading. Then you
> > posted
> > > > the neuroscience article on bottom up and top down 
> processes and my
> > > > intentions on where to go next became wobbly and topsy-
> turvy (sp?)
> > > > However it certainly leaves me wondering and curious.
> > > >
> > > > I will post a thought to the neuroscience post but I just 
> want to
> > mention
> > > > that Fonagy, and Gergely and Target are working in the 
> spaces of
> > > > BETWEENNESS (the hyphen in the "I -other" dialectic) that 
> seems to be
> > such
> > > > a fertile place to stand.
> > > >
> > > > Mike,
> > > > I would appreciate if you could expand your way of contrasting
> > > > Tomasello and Vygotsky with Trevarthan and PRIMARY 
> intersubjectivity.> (It
> > > > may be in your article posted.) This seems to be in my ZPD 
> and seems to
> > be
> > > > central to my big question.
> > > > I have been reading various contrasting models of 
> intersubjectivity> from
> > > > Hegel Habermas, to Buber, to Mead, to relational 
> psychoanalysis (many
> > > > contrasting views) such as Stern, Fonagy, to feminists 
> such as Jessica
> > > > Benjamin and they all speak to positioning ourselves in 
> the PLACE or
> > SPACE
> > > > of BETWEENNESS (as an abstract ground) However the devil 
> is in the
> > details
> > > > or particularity of how we imagine (INTERPRET) THIS 
> METAPHORICAL SPACE.
> > > > Winnicott's "holding environment" also is a metaphor for 
> this space.
> > > > This metaphorical image of spaces for me is evocative 
> because it allows
> > us
> > > > to ask the "ideal" ethical and moral question of how we 
> facilitate,> > > or guide, the MUTUAL co-creation of these 
> "OPENING SPACES" and promote
> > the
> > > > development of the "inclusive self" (see Jessica 
> Benjamin's "The Bond's
> > of
> > > > Love")
> > > > Vygotsky and sociocultural theory seems to me to be the 
> paradigm that
> > > > speaks most clearly and practically to ways to open spaces 
> in our
> > schools.
> > > >
> > > > Finally a quick comment on the constructs of "intentionallity"
> > > > "anticipation" "evaluation" and "judgement". The metaphor 
> of opening
> > spaces
> > > > must be always vigilant to mutuality in the relationally 
> constructed> open
> > > > spaces. When successful these open spaces lead to mutual 
> recognition> and
> > > > emotional experiences of "vitality" and "engagement" in 
> encounters and
> > > > performances. When we unintentionally communicate 
> judgements or
> > evaluations
> > > > mutuality collapses into "complimentary" asymmetrical 
> patterns which
> > the
> > > > cultural-critical discourses elaborate. (Buber's "I-it" 
> objectifying> stance
> > > > which collapses "open spaces)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks everyone on CHAT who leave me permanently confused (and
> > fascinated)
> > > >
> > > > Larry
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > > > Date: Sunday, December 13, 2009 7:21 am
> > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] bodies and artifacts
> > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > > >
> > > > > The book description came through, Larry. Attached is 
> the most
> > > > > recent Fonagy
> > > > > article i could find that appeared general. His work 
> looks very
> > > > > interesting,thanks. I have not read it yet, but that 
> fact that
> > > > > Gergeley is a co-author
> > > > > indicates that issues of intentionality are involved and 
> I am
> > > > > very curious
> > > > > to see if the effects you talk about are connected with 
> changes> > > > at 9months.
> > > > > First guess, it would fit with Tomasello and Vygotsky, 
> but if it
> > > > > fits with
> > > > > Trevarthan and primary intersubjectivity it will be a suprise.
> > > > > We'll see.
> > > > >
> > > > > A brief paper on this topic I wrote for an audience for 
> whom the
> > > > > idea that
> > > > > culture mediates human activity was a novelty, and that 
> there is
> > > > > a two way
> > > > > relation between "natural" and "cultural" is also attached.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks a lot for the pointer.
> > > > > mike
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 10:10 PM, Larry Purss
> > > > > <lpurss@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Vera
> > > > > > I sent an attachment through CHAT but I don't think it went
> > through.
> > > > > > Fonagy and three other authors wrote the book "Affect 
> regulation,> > > > > Mentalization, and the Development of the Self.
> > > > > > It is an extension of Bowlby's and Winnicott's 
> approach (He
> > > > > works at the
> > > > > > same Tavistock institute in London) and its 
> interweaving with his
> > > > > > understanding of Hegel and intersubjectivity theory.
> > > > > > The summary of infant studies from a relational 
> framework is
> > > > > excellent.> Some of the "clinical" approaches in the 
> second half
> > > > > of the book may be
> > > > > > critqued.
> > > > > > Also I wonder how feminist scholars may critique the 
> focus on
> > > > > "mothers"?>
> > > > > > However the detail (though sometimes overwhelming) is
> > systematically
> > > > > > presented and builds a coherent perspective on the 
> centrality> > > > of relational
> > > > > > processes to the development of subjectivity.
> > > > > > Larry
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: Vera Steiner <vygotsky@unm.edu>
> > > > > > Date: Saturday, December 12, 2009 8:04 pm
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] bodies and artifacts
> > > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" 
> <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Larry,
> > > > > > > I would be interested in a link to Fonagy's recent 
> publications.> > > > > > I am
> > > > > > > related to him and am doubly curious about his work.
> > > > > > > Thanks, Vera
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Larry Purss" <lpurss@shaw.ca>
> > > > > > > To: <ablunden@mira.net>; "eXtended Mind, Culture, 
> Activity"> > > > > > <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > > > > > > Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2009 8:51 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] bodies and artifacts
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andy
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I believe the reason we are cautious about brain 
> research is it
> > > > > > > usually
> > > > > > > implies "biology" as foundational to being human. The
> > > > > > > reason I mention
> > > > > > > Fonagy and others exploring the foundational 
> premises of infant
> > > > > > > development
> > > > > > > is they are starting from intersubjectivity as prior to
> > > > > > > subjectivity and it
> > > > > > > is only within relational contexts that a sense of 
> subjectivity> > > > > > arises or
> > > > > > > emerges. They are using brain research to support this
> > > > > > > relational paradigm.
> > > > > > > Larry
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
> > > > > > > Date: Saturday, December 12, 2009 7:28 pm
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] bodies and artifacts
> > > > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" 
> <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Larry,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In my first forrays into this discussion on 
> emotion, I found
> > > > > > > > myself introducing talk of physiological 
> observations in a
> > > > > > > > way I would never have thought of doing in 
> relation to
> > > > > > > > cognition. After reading about the 300 years of 
> reflections> > > > > > > on the physiology of emotion in 
> Vygotsky's article, I was
> > > > > > > > left asking myself: why? Why do I think it is 
> important to
> > > > > > > > investigate the physiology of emotion, while I 
> hold such a
> > > > > > > > low opinion of the place of physiological 
> investigations in
> > > > > > > > understanding the normal process of cognition.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Consciousness is the outcome of the intersection 
> of two
> > > > > > > > objective processes: human physiology and human 
> behaviour.> > > > > > > This is equally true of both emotion and 
> cognition.> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > While the marketing, military and medial 
> industries are
> > > > > > > > spending billions of dollars on neurological 
> investigations,> > > > > > > I would think that CHAT people 
> would be interested in
> > > > > > > > questions like the role of emotion in learning, 
> behaviour,> > > > > > > addicition, the formation of social 
> bonds, and so on,
> > > > > > > > investigating such questions with dual stimulation type
> > > > > > > > experiments, with artifacts that are more or less 
> affect-laden.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Andy
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Larry Purss wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Mike
> > > > > > > > > Your comment that this leaves us only at the starting
> > > > > gate of
> > > > > > > > understanding how bodies can be "written on" points
> > > > > to the
> > > > > > > > research and reflection on the relation of changes 
> in the brain
> > > > > > > > mediated by culture.
> > > > > > > > > One area of research that is exploring how the 
> brain is
> > > > > > > > changed via mediation is intersubjective infant 
> developmental> > > > > > > studies that are mapping 
> physiological changes in one person's
> > > > > > > > brain that "mirrors" similar physiological brain
> > > > > > > > changes being generated during the activity of the
> > > > > > > > other person. Fonagy is doing research in this area
> > > > > > > > and has written a detailed summary of the research 
> in this
> > area.
> > > > > > > > His term for this intersubjective process is 
> "mentalization".> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Larry
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > From: mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > Date: Saturday, December 12, 2009 12:19 pm
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] bodies and artifacts
> > > > > > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
> > > > > <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> I do not have all this sorted out by a long 
> shot, but
> > > > > my own
> > > > > > > > way
> > > > > > > > >> of thinking
> > > > > > > > >> about the issue is that humans are hybrids, 
> really complex
> > > > > > > > >> one's. Their
> > > > > > > > >> brains have LITERALLY been shaped by prior 
> genrations of
> > > > > > > > >> mediation of
> > > > > > > > >> activity through material artifacts, their 
> brains (and often
> > > > > > > > >> other parts of
> > > > > > > > >> the bodies) cannot operate normally without 
> inclusion of
> > > > > > > > >> artifacts, they can
> > > > > > > > >> be "written on" as jay points out.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> The problem is that this leaves us only at the 
> starting gate
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > >> furtherdevelopment of this point of view. I 
> found that
> > > > > > > > >> experimental study I sent
> > > > > > > > >> around sort of interest in this regard, even 
> though it
> > > > > > > > provides
> > > > > > > > >> such sketchy
> > > > > > > > >> detail and assumes so much about its cultural 
> content and
> > > > > > > > >> organization. The
> > > > > > > > >> developmental implications, which in our 
> current discussion
> > > > > > > > >> would mean, the
> > > > > > > > >> organization of hybridity during ontogeny, 
> which in
> > > > > turn has
> > > > > > > > >> implicationsfor the cognition/emotion
> > > > > > > > >> discussion.
> > > > > > > > >> mike
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Jay Lemke
> > > > > > > > >> <jaylemke@umich.edu> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>> One of the ways I have found useful to think 
> about the body
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > >> relation to
> > > > > > > > >>> semiotic mediation is to see the body as, 
> among other
> > > > > > > > things,
> > > > > > > > >> a semiotic
> > > > > > > > >>> artifact.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> What I mean by semiotic artifact is a material 
> object or
> > > > > > > > >> substrate that can
> > > > > > > > >>> be written on and read from, much like a 
> printed page
> > > > > or an
> > > > > > > > >> architectural> drawing. Written on, in the 
> general semiotic
> > > > > > > > >> sense, not necessarily in
> > > > > > > > >>> words, but in signs of some kind: meaningful 
> features that
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > >> be "read" or
> > > > > > > > >>> made sense of by people (or nonhumans, but 
> that's another
> > > > > > > > >> story) in that our
> > > > > > > > >>> meaning-mediated world, and our actions that 
> respond to
> > > > > > > that world
> > > > > > > > >>> (including by trying to change or re-create it 
> or just
> > > > > > > > imagine
> > > > > > > > >> it in some
> > > > > > > > >>> new way), are affected by our encounter with the
> > > > > features of
> > > > > > > > >> the semiotic
> > > > > > > > >>> object, according to some community 
> interpretive practices,
> > > > > > > > >> with our own
> > > > > > > > >>> individual variations on them.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> At a very obvious level, bodies can be dressed 
> up in signs:
> > > > > > > > >> hair styles,
> > > > > > > > >>> tans, cosmetics. And this can be taken to a more
> > > > > > > > "artifactual"
> > > > > > > > >> form with
> > > > > > > > >>> dress, or a more physiological form with, say, 
> body-
> > > > > > > > building.
> > > > > > > > >> From tattoos
> > > > > > > > >>> to ripped abs is a small shift when we are 
> thinking about
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> body as a
> > > > > > > > >>> writable/readable object. If we want to get 
> still more
> > > > > > > > >> physiological, and
> > > > > > > > >>> think not only about reading other people's 
> bodies, but
> > > > > > > > >> reading our own,
> > > > > > > > >>> then the proprioceptive feelings we sense 
> within out bodies
> > > > > > > > >> can be
> > > > > > > > >>> considered signs as well, whether exhilaration 
> or nausea,
> > > > > > > > >> strength or
> > > > > > > > >>> weakness, etc. The meaning of these feelings 
> is certainly
> > > > > > > > culturally>>> mediated. They are physiological 
> phenomena, but
> > > > > > > > they are also
> > > > > > > > >> meaningful> cultural phenomena, with value judgements
> > > > > > > > attached,
> > > > > > > > >> with intertexts in
> > > > > > > > >>> literature, etc.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> And we can deliberately write to our most 
> physiological> > > > > > > >> states, e.g. with
> > > > > > > > >>> drugs, to produce feelings that have cultural 
> meanings and
> > > > > > > > >> values for us,
> > > > > > > > >>> whether of calm or elation, energy or hallucination.
> > > > > And to
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > >> considerable> extent, our modifications of our body
> > > > > > > > physiology
> > > > > > > > >> can be "read" by others,
> > > > > > > > >>> just as can our made physiques, tattoos, or 
> hair styles.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> So I would say that the body mediates our 
> sense of the
> > world
> > > > > > > > >> and ourselves
> > > > > > > > >>> and other people in at least two ways: 
> directly through
> > > > > > > > >> physiology, as with
> > > > > > > > >>> hormonal responses, sensory modalities of 
> perception,> bodily
> > > > > > > > >> affordances and
> > > > > > > > >>> dis-affordances ("handicaps" for example), 
> etc. AND
> > > > > also in
> > > > > > > > >> these other,
> > > > > > > > >>> clearly semiotic and cultural ways, as a 
> semiotic artifact,
> > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > >> well as with
> > > > > > > > >>> the cultural overlays of meaning that lie over and
> > > > > color the
> > > > > > > > >> meanings and
> > > > > > > > >>> responses to all the direct physiological 
> mediations.> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> I do not, however, know what being wooden on a 
> rainy day
> > > > > > > > feels
> > > > > > > > >> like to a
> > > > > > > > >>> chair.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> JAY.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> Jay Lemke
> > > > > > > > >>> Professor (Adjunct, 2009-2010)
> > > > > > > > >>> Educational Studies
> > > > > > > > >>> University of Michigan
> > > > > > > > >>> Ann Arbor, MI 48109
> > > > > > > > >>> www.umich.edu/~jaylemke 
> <http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejaylemke><> 
> http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejaylemke>> > > > 
> <http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejaylemke> <
> > > > > > http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejaylemke>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> Visiting Scholar
> > > > > > > > >>> Laboratory for Comparative Human Communication
> > > > > > > > >>> University of California -- San Diego
> > > > > > > > >>> La Jolla, CA
> > > > > > > > >>> USA 92093
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> On Dec 7, 2009, at 4:14 AM, Mabel Encinas wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> Ok. You have a point. Then, lets start 
> thinking from an
> > > > > > > > >> embodied approach
> > > > > > > > >>>> :)
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> Let's accept that the body is an artifact. 
> What is
> > > > > then the
> > > > > > > > >> difference>> between a chair and the body. Both 
> are yes,
> > > > > > > > >> "products of human art", as you
> > > > > > > > >>>> express it. However, only in the process 
> (practice) there
> > > > > > > > >> seem to be a
> > > > > > > > >>>> difference. Both are material and ideal (the 
> body is not
> > > > > > > > >> separated from the
> > > > > > > > >>>> mind; the chair, this one here that I feel is 
> made of
> > cloth
> > > > > > > > >> and a cushioned
> > > > > > > > >>>> material, plastic, metal, and involves the 
> ideal that a
> > > > > > > > >> designer and workers
> > > > > > > > >>>> in a factory transformed so people could seat on).
> > > > > What is
> > > > > > > > >> the difference?
> > > > > > > > >>>> Mabel
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 22:53:40 +1100
> > > > > > > > >>>>> From: ablunden@mira.net
> > > > > > > > >>>>> To: liliamabel@hotmail.com
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] bodies and artifacts
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Well, the body is the body is the body. The 
> reason the
> > > > > > > > >>>>> question arises for me is when we make
> > > > > generalisations in
> > > > > > > > >>>>> which things like person, artefact, consciousness,
> > > > > concept,> > > >>>>> action, and so on, figure, where 
> does the
> > > > > body fit in? My
> > > > > > > > >>>>> response was that even though it is 
> obviously unique
> > > > > in many
> > > > > > > > >>>>> ways, it falls into the same category as 
> artefacts.> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> My questions to you are: what harm is done? 
> why is
> > > > > anything> > > >>>>> ignored? And, what is the body if it 
> is not
> > > > > a material
> > > > > > > > >>>>> product of human art, used by human beings?
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Andy
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Mabel Encinas wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Is this way being fruitful? That is why I 
> do not
> > > > > like to
> > > > > > > > >> consider the
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> body as an artifact. Did not cognitive 
> pscyhology do
> > > > > > > > that?
> > > > > > > > >> (Bruner, Acts
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> of Meaning). Then intentions and all the 
> teleological> > > > > > > >> aspects are so
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> much ignored...
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Mabel
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 20:21:09 +1100
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> From: ablunden@mira.net
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> To: liliamabel@hotmail.com
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] bodies and artifacts
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Sure. But the body has been constructed 
> like a living
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> machine - the various artefacts that you use
> > > > > > > (especially but
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> not only language and images) are "internalized"
> > > > > in some
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> way. So one (external) artefact is 
> replaced by another
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> (internal) artefact. Yes?
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Andy
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Mabel Encinas wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> However, sometimes practices do not 
> involve other
> > > > > artefact> > > >>>>>>>> than the body (some practices are
> > > > > directed to the
> > > > > > > > body),
> > > > > > > > >> and that was
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> why I was talking about the limit of thinking
> > > > > about the
> > > > > > > > >> body as
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> artefact... is that a limit? That is why 
> I mentioned
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> body as "the
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> raw material". I was thinking for example 
> practices> > > > > > > >> linked to
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> meditation
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> and the like, for example, among many others.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Mabel
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> --------------------------------------------
> --------
> > > > > ----
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >> ------------
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Keep your friends updated— even when you’re not
> > > > > signed in.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> <
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > 
> http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-
> > > > > > > > >> it-in-action/social-network-
> > > > > > > > >> basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-
> > > > > xm:SI_SB_5:092010> > > >>>>> --
> > > > > > > > >>>>> ---------------------------------------------
> --------
> > > > > ----
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >> -----------
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev,
> > > > > Meshcheryakov,> > > >>>>> Ilyenkov $20 ea
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > 
> _________________________________________________________________>> >>>>
> > > > > > Windows Live Hotmail: Your friends can get your Facebook
> > > > > > > > >> updates, right
> > > > > > > > >>>> from Hotmail®.
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > 
> http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-
> > > > > > > > >> it-in-action/social-network-
> > > > > > > > >> basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > 
> xm:SI_SB_4:092009_______________________________________________>>>>> 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/xm
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Windows Live: Friends get your Flickr, Yelp, and Digg updates 
> when they
> > e-mail you.
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Windows Live: Keep your friends up to date with what you do online.
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-
> in-action/social-network-
> basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_1:092010_______________________________________________
> > 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