Re: [xmca] A Good Class or a Good Show?

[yuan lai <laiyuantaiwan@gmail.com>]

Me too! Sorry to have praised you in this public place the other day, Mike.
I guess I like to give praises when others give presents around this time
:-) But also I just like what you have been doing (this smaller-scale praise
ok?). I don’t have a lot of faith in top-down changes via political means.
So I shared attitude with you about affecting changes (or rather, trying to
make changes; trying is all we do and can do, right?) within our own
circles.

My remote access to the university library system has been having a problem.
I'd appreciate your forwarding the article by Miller, Fung, and Mintz.
Thanks.

Yuan


On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 1:13 PM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks to both of you, and Jay, for the interesting comments on the Gratier
> et al article. The timing is uncanny because I spent the morning working on
> the syllabus for a course on culture and development and today's efforts
> with the problem of cultural styles and cultural differences in patterns of
> socialization. Your detailed stories of praise and criticism in different
> socio-cultural contexts were really helpful in increasing my ability to
> think about the issues in a nuanced way (sorry if that sounds like praise
> in
> a public setting!-- down nail down?).
>
> If you are interested, I could forward one of the articles i encountered on
> exactly this topic: Miller, Fung, and Mintz:  Self-Construction Through
> Narrative Practices: A Chinese and American Comparison of Early
> Socialization. (The very same Miller mentioned by Ageliki in her not to
> which i have yet to respond).
>
> The issue of time scales will have to wait, but you gave only
> three time scales when you called our four david. phylog-onto-mico.
> Where is cultural-historical time? At the level of activities like LCHC and
> activity systems for kids, I have used the term, meso. More
> to come. I was up early talking to folks in Helsinki and need to sleep that
> off for a while... something to do with space/time/age.
> mike
>
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 1:29 AM, David Kellogg <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Yuan:
> >
> > Thanks for a very rich and thought-provoking note. I too am Chinese, by
> > marriage and by choice (in the same way that Obama chose to be black),
> and
> > so I know all about dressing one's kids warmly and cooking well instead
> of
> > offering cheap talk (whether praise or criticism). In fact, a lot of the
> > criticism I get from my wife is along those lines: her most common
> > criticisms about my hygiene are veiled concerns about my getting sick and
> > her usual way of finding out if I am uncomfortable is to say "A dead pig
> > doesn't know how hot the water is").
> >
> > I have found that Chinese people and especially Koreans praise their
> > PROFESSORS far more fulsomely than Westerners tend to, and at first, as a
> > professor, I found this rather embarrassing. Thinking about it, I decided
> > that the key factor underlying all of these differences is a much
> > higher preference for sincerity. The problem is that when Western parents
> > indulge in fulsome praise of a child, the child cannot help but suspect
> that
> > the praise is INSINCERE, because they are often being praised for things
> > that adults really do much better.
> >
> > My wife tells a very bitter story about how when she was growing up one
> of
> > her mother's co-workers praised her for her knitting and asked her how to
> do
> > it, so she proudly showed her how. She was then completely disgusted to
> find
> > an almost fully knitted sweater on the woman's bunk in the workers'
> > dormintory (it wa the early seventies and workers tended to live
> together),
> > so she knew that the woman already knew how to knit and resolved never to
> > trust praise from grown-ups again.
> >
> > When my students send me presents and embarrassingly fulsome notes of
> > praise, they are often genuinely referring to skills which I have and
> they
> > do not have yet, and so I never ever feel that there is any insincerity
> in
> > them. On the other hand, I just came back from the USA and was really
> struck
> > by how little of the praise I heard for my wife's thesis work contained
> any
> > genuine desire to acquire knowledge or the methodology contained therein
> and
> > how hard it was to tell it from the pro forma sort as a result. My wife
> was
> > actually much more attentive to the criticism; it seemed more concrete,
> more
> > detailed, and either as cause or as result struck her as a lot more
> sincere.
> >
> > One piece of knowledge and methodology that I genunely lack and
> > genuinely would like to acquire is Jay's work on timescales; but I found
> it
> > rather difficult to map them onto the four time scales of
> > phylo-onto-microgenesis that sociocultural theory usually uses. On the
> other
> > hand, I find the leap from onto- to micro- too large; I suspect that
> there
> > is an intermediary timescale somewhere (and I KNOW there is one in text,
> we
> > cannot simply treat a book and a sentence as the same level of
> > organization). Sometimes I even wonder if THIS is the source of the
> problem
> > we often have actually describing and operationalizing the link between
> > learning and development. (This is elswhere referred to on this list as
> the
> > zoped problem).
> >
> > David Kellogg
> > Seoul National University of Education
> >
> > --- On Sun, 12/20/09, yuan lai <laiyuantaiwan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From: yuan lai <laiyuantaiwan@gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [xmca] A Good Class or a Good Show?
> > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > Date: Sunday, December 20, 2009, 6:27 PM
> >
> >
> > David, I think it's not so much the merits or demerits of an article as
> the
> > monthly discussion paper's role at xmca. I think of the discussion paper
> as
> > a piece to hold our shared attention, accessible to all and for all
> > interested to comment on, not about what could have been, as it, like all
> > research work, has its constraints, but, like a museum display, to make
> > visible our own different takes, yet another way to share (“I didn’t know
> > you also…”), to reaffirm, to envision “what could be”, etc. But how one
> > feels about something does matter (neutral feelings usually means less
> > speaking and acting), especially when there are other means to be members
> > of
> > a community. On the other hand, the sponataneous tends to be irregular,
> > although not a problem at xmca. (I seem to be switching positions back
> and
> > forth)
> >
> > I have been thinking how less praise is linked to collectivistic
> cultures.
> > I
> > speak from personal experiences. I’m a Chinese and Chinese culture is
> > characterized as collectivistic. When I first came over to North America,
> > as
> > an adult, I was struck by the amount of praise parents and teachers
> lavish
> > on children, as well as how much parents and adults talk to babies and
> > toddlers, among other things. Gradually, the unfamiliar becomes familiar.
> > My
> > own experience of growing up at home, back in Taiwan, is that my parents
> > did
> > not hug me and my siblings much at all (all my aunts and uncles did the
> > same, but my grandfather always hugged and kissed his grandchildren; I
> > still
> > recall complaining to him about his beard). But children growing up in
> such
> > homes know that their parents love them because there are many ways to
> show
> > love. My mom loves me every time when she cooks the food I like; my dad
> > shows his love for me when he asks me to dress warmly. Chinese may get or
> > give less praise, but we know it IS praise when parents do not say
> anything
> > upon reading a report card of straight A’s. That’s a high school student
> > put
> > it to me; she knew her parents were pleased. Good grades are expected and
> > both children and parents know. Overt praise among Chinese people, based
> on
> > my personal experience and immigrants in Canada that I have experienced
> at
> > that time, is not necessary because of shared expectations. I guess it
> > would
> > be the same with behavior. Someone I know told a story, which happened
> many
> > years ago when she first arrived in New York from China. The host family
> > picked her up at the airport in the evening and asked her if she would
> like
> > something to eat before going to bed. She thanked her host and declined.
> > She
> > was expecting a second offer and ready to accept that. But the second
> offer
> > never was made. Of course, the host family did not know the Chinese code
> > for
> > being a host. That was some years ago when I talked to some other
> immigrant
> > Chinese about parental expectations. I don’t know the newer generation
> and
> > how much parenting practices has changed or not. I can’t judge fairly my
> > own
> > parenting practices.
> >
> > In the example of expectations understood between and among parties, I
> > think
> > it is not so much “less praise” as to how praise is expressed, via body
> > language or because there is less perceived need (due to shared, tacit
> > understanding). But I’m not sure if “less praise” means “more criticism”,
> > which Gratier et al. seem to place on the same plane. Looking at personal
> > experiences on the speculated mechanism of “less praise”, I would think
> > that, if a parent frowns while reading a report card, it is an expression
> > of
> > criticism and there shouldn’t be different patterns of occurrences. But
> > then
> > again we are human and we probably let out our anger when shared
> > expectations aren’t met than to withhold praise, at least openly, when
> good
> > results come in. It appears that Gratier et al. refer to a different way
> of
> > conceptualizing praise and criticism. They write, “one element in the
> > ‘collectivistic’ worldview is a dispreference for praise, which makes one
> > child stand out” (p. 297). This implies that praise or criticism is given
> > in
> > public or at least there is an audience or potential audience. There is a
> > saying, a nail that sticks out gets pushed down (as opposed to “a squeaky
> > wheel gets oiled”). I can’t sort out what this means to me at the moment.
> > But my question is that, if praise makes one child stand out, wouldn’t
> > criticism also do? If so, we should expect to see less criticism in
> > collectivistic culture, but the authors expected it in the opposite
> > direction. I’m thinking why people in collectivistic societies might be
> > fearless of making their young stand out with criticism. The only thing I
> > could think of now is a Chinese tradition to name one’s children humbly
> so
> > as not to invoke anger from gods or something. But I think it is more a
> > tradition of the past and applies to private names family members used
> for
> > their youngsters. Most Chinese names I know are grand sounding! Like
> > “Beautiful flowers” or “Righteous Way.” There are some exceptions; One
> > neighbor of mine formally named her daughter “Dian Dian”, which means Dot
> > Dot. But that may suggest more fondness than fear of standing out.
> >
> > For me, Jay's article, Across the Scales of Time: Artifacts, Activities,
> > and
> > Meanings in Ecosocial Systems, inspires “what could be”. The parts of the
> > article on the adabatic and heterochrony principles are a bit difficult
> for
> > me (at first at least), but the rest is a treat! I was thinking of how it
> > would apply to young immigrant children in Gratier et al. and
> > methodological
> > considerations as I read it. I like very much Jay’s view on page 288: “we
> > still tend to define our objects of study in such a way that a single
> > researcher could in principle come to understand them. This appears to be
> a
> > contradiction in the case of ecosocial systems. The longest timescale
> > processes that characterize such systems are almost certainly longer than
> a
> > human lifetime. We cannot study such a system from more than a few of the
> > many viewpoints within it, and we honestly do not expect all these views
> to
> > fit consistently together. We need at least a team to conduct such a
> study,
> > one as diverse or nearly so as the system under study, and along the same
> > dimensions of difference. And we need a self-sustaining institution that
> > will last long enough to observe major historical change in the system.
> ‘It
> > takes a village’ to study a village.”
> >
> > (correction of phrases, errors, and misinterpretation is welcome) How to
> > study longer-term processes and patterns (longer than one lifetime) in
> > shorter-term processes? The individualism-collectivism is a framework
> > Gratier et al. use; topdown frameworks (perhaps having been developed
> from
> > bottom up) can be useful but, as lived through individuals with different
> > variations, they are evolving, albeit probably at snail pace in a vast
> > land.
> > Jay's envisioning of a self-sustaining institution, perhaps global in
> > nature
> > (a future plan for LCHC perhaps?), would help track longer- or
> shorter-term
> > processes across different timescales. As carriers of longer-term
> > processess, how would the Latino children in Gratier et al. interpret the
> > teacher’s, say, verbal or nonverbal signs of praise and criticism,
> intended
> > by the teacher or not? How would this interpretation relate to their own
> > perceptions and practices around their parents’ praise or criticism? How
> do
> > researchers invite children to reflect on what they have just
> experienced?
> > What emergent processes and patterns in the classrooms where different
> > worlds come into contact? As I think about these, I see that researchers
> in
> > the future would write with less finality of their interpretation (even
> > when
> > interpretations of participants are incorporated) if they intend their
> work
> > to continue living, so to speak. Perhaps let the data speak for
> themselves
> > more. Perhaps more built-in design to allow the data to be compared with
> > research of similar nature in databanks for future researchers to mine
> the
> > data.
> >
> > Yuan
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:25 PM, David Kellogg <
> vaughndogblack@yahoo.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Mike, I think that the answer (to the temporary lull in the discussion
> of
> > > the Gratier et al article) is of course all of the below: final exams,
> > end
> > > of quarter, and a certain amount of delicacy over an article that at
> > least
> > > some of us see as deeply problematic (see Jay's comments, especially).
> > >
> > > I often think it's more useful to bring whatever discussion we are
> > > currently having (e.g. bodies and artifacts, emotion and cognition)
> > around
> > > to the article at hand rather than vice versa.
> > >
> > > Some of our most successful and fruitful discussions have (alas for
> me!)
> > > also been some of our most general.
> > >
> > > This is partly thanks to the very articulate and ardent philosophers on
> > the
> > > list, but it's also because general means inclusive, transdisciplinary,
> a
> > > party to which every party's invited except the bouncer.
> > >
> > > Now it seems to me that the Gratier et al. article really does have a
> > > bearing on both the "bodies and artefacts" thread and the "emotion and
> > > cognition" one. As I already said, I think the "bodies and artefacts"
> > > connection is INTONATION and STRESS: this is the way that gesture
> really
> > > "goes underground" in language, and so I think that Gratier et al (and
> > also
> > > Wolff-Michael Roth) are right to look at it in all its spectrographic
> > > splendor. But the level of detail we get that way has to somehow be
> > > harnessed to a more macrogenetic perspective to do much good.
> > >
> > > This time I have a comment on the "emotion and cognition" thread. In
> > > Chapter Two of Thinking and Speech, Vygotsky spends a LOT of time
> quoting
> > > Bleuler. I've just been reading Bleuler's book on autism in the
> library.
> > > Vygotsky likes him because of his rejection of the over-extended
> content
> > of
> > > the autistic function (actually, as we shall see, an over-extended
> > > conception of the reality function)..
> > >
> > > We can see, even if Bleuler cannot, the beginnings of Hegelian triad
> > > describing the emergence of higher EMOTIONAL functions. The first,
> > > relatively unmediated response, to reality is an instance of the
> reality
> > > function, but it is based on perception and sensation. Here the
> > James-Lange
> > > formula that we feel sad because we perceive ourselves crying or we
> feel
> > > frightened because we feel the sensations of our body running away from
> a
> > > bear may be a useful metaphor (except for the obvious homunculus
> problem
> > it
> > > raises), or at least a catchy inversion of the individual subjectivist
> > view
> > > of the genesis of affect.
> > >
> > > >From this primal, biological response a second, more fully
> psychological
> > > response is born. As Bleuler points out, it requires a relatively
> complex
> > > response, because it involves the recollection of sensation, and even
> > > turning away from the immediate sources of sensation. This is the
> > autistic
> > > function proper, and it is not genetically primary. When this response
> > > becomes linked to itself, rather than to objective events, we get
> > > “irrealist” logic, the pleasure principle, the associative links of
> > dreams
> > > which Vygotsky refuses to call “symbolic”.
> > >
> > > Finally, there is a third response, which is “realistic” in the sense
> > that
> > > it is oriented towards an objective state of affairs existing between
> > people
> > > rather than within them. Yet it is mediated, by recollection and
> > reflection,
> > > and above all by language. Here is where we must look for higher
> > affective
> > > functions, culturally mediated emotions, and conceptually based
> > aesthetics.
> > >
> > > This third response is also where we need to look to find the basis of
> a
> > > Spinozan—a socialist—ethics; like the second response, it considers
> human
> > > pleasure and the satisfaction of desire to be a positive good. But like
> > the
> > > first response, it is objective, in the sense that it is not
> > individualistic
> > > but socially shared through and through. Bleuler, a biologically
> oriented
> > > psychologist, cannot get us this far. But Vygotsky can!
> > >
> > > When I read Gratier et al. I am impressed by how many of the
> descriptions
> > > of the Bridging Cultures Classroom contain descriptions of positive
> > affect,
> > > and how many of the non-Bridging Cultures Classroom are rather
> negative.
> > >
> > > But of course a good class cannot simply be a chain of what
> Wolff-Michael
> > > calls emotionally positive valences; some such chains are going to be
> at
> > the
> > > lowest level of physical response (e.g. the satisfaction of desire,
> such
> > as
> > > when kids get treats in class) and a good many more are going to be at
> > the
> > > level Bleuler is calling autistic; the chain of "one positive valence
> > after
> > > another" that we often see as a substitute for plot in children's
> > literature
> > > and a substitute for a script in kids' movies.
> > >
> > > So we need more than glowing descriptions in order to see what
> > experienced
> > > teachers see at a glance: the difference between a good show and a good
> > > class! One of my grads is working on this right now; the idea is to
> test
> > the
> > > positive valence of particular topics in a conversation by counting the
> > > number of times they get brought up voluntarily by one child and
> > continued
> > > by others.
> > >
> > > We initially thought we would use this technique just to find out who
> the
> > > kids wanted to talk about: did they want to talk about the characters
> in
> > the
> > > textbook, or about their teacher an their classmates? Surprisingly,
> they
> > > often chose the textbook characters, and they were particularly
> > interested
> > > in...the TEACHER character. In their chat about real people, they also
> > > prefer the teacher as a topic. Perhaps this is part of OUR culture,
> > though!
> > >
> > > While writing this, though, a problem occurred to me. The topics that
> get
> > > the most "hits" and which run the longest in classroom conversations
> > really
> > > represent two rather contradictory things: the ability to stimulate
> > > interventions from the most voluble participants, and the ability to
> > > generalize to the interests of the greatest possible number. On xmca,
> of
> > > course, that means topics of a certain generality and abstractness. In
> > our
> > > classroom data, though, that tends to mean the teacher.
> > >
> > > David Kellogg
> > > Seoul National University of Education
> > >
> > >
> > > --- On Sun, 12/13/09, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > From: mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [xmca] bodies and artifacts
> > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > > Date: Sunday, December 13, 2009, 8:38 AM
> > >
> > >
> > > My apologies for posting the les treilles paper twice. it did not show
> on
> > > my
> > > screen. As "recompense" here is a review of a book that
> > > promotes the idea of "bio-cultural co-constructivism" without mention
> of
> > > Vygotsky anywhere. Perhaps, as a result, it leads some of its adherents
> > > into
> > > some (in my opinion) inappropriate reduction of culture to "the
> > > environment," thereby opening up a very old, very stinky, can of worms.
> > >
> > > Question: Many people on XMCA voted to discuss the
> > > "Tacit Communicative Style and Cultural Attunement in Classroom
> > > Interaction"<
> > > http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content%7Edb=all%7Econtent=a915635308
> > > >article,
> > > but very few have followed David's lead in discussing it directly.
> > > Is it because of final exam time on both a quarter and semester system
> in
> > > the US? Or voting as a prelude to spectatorship? Where are those
> voters?
> > >
> > > mike
> > >
> > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 7:20 AM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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> <
> > > >> 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
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca