Re: [xmca] perception/conception etc

[mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>]

Sorry-- That message was to someone off list quoting just a bit of what was
on list. No point in trying to recover the context. delete. later.
mike

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth <mroth@uvic.ca> wrote:

> Mike,
> I don't understand. Without intersubjectivity, no culture would be
> possible. The problem arises when you try to think culture from
> individualism rather than from Life. We couldn't even try to find out
> whether we are understanding in the same/similar way if we did not already
> share in intersubjectivity.
>
> This is why philosophers like Jean-Luc Nancy or Emmanuel Levinas begin with
> the pre-being WITH, that unfolds into Self-Other. Prior to the self-other
> distinction prior to self seeing another self is the WITH that allows us to
> see the other as other and ourselves as self.
>
> :-)
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> On 2010-07-09, at 5:36 PM, mike cole wrote:
>
> Yes, this is the way to go.
> But intersubjectivity is not impossible, but the circumstances are rare.
> ask me when you see me.
> mike
>
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:
>
> > Michael,
> >
> > This is the famous and familiar 'chicken-sexing' phenomenon. Experts are
> > able to tell the sex of day-old chickens, and can't explain why. The best
> > chicken sexers come from Japan, where the  Zen-Nippon Chick Sexing School
> > has 2-year long courses.
> >
> > But I don't follow your argument. You seem to be saying, since they can't
> > explain what they do in words, they have no concepts. But they must have
> > something, so they have percepts.
> >
> > You are apparently equating a concept with a 'cultural label' that is
> > 'stuck' on an object, as though we could only recognize a barrel if it
> were
> > labelled 'barrel,' if not literally then metaphorically.  That seems a
> > rather simplistic view of what concepts do. And actually the chicken
> sexers
> > do employ cultural labels - as do your fish sorters, I presume. The
> chicken
> > sexers say to themselves, 'male chick,' 'female chick.' They simply can't
> > introspect the characteristics they have identified which have enabled
> them
> > to attach the label. Your fish sorters are saying, 'good fish, 'bad
> fish,'
> > or something similar. Obviously these are cultural-historical
> distinctions,
> > right?
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On Jul 9, 2010, at 6:14 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth wrote:
> >
> >> See, even without the notion of "barrel", you perceive a shape and do
> not
> > run into it. This shape, prior to all cultural labels you might stick to
> it
> > or recognize it as part of cultural-historical activity, is some shape
> that
> > exists for you in your practices. In two papers, one in Journal of
> > Pragmatics and the other in Social Studies of Science, I describe
> phenomena
> > for which there are no words or concepts and yet people act toward it.
> For
> > example, fish culturists sort fish. They can't tell you the difference
> > between the ones that go to the right, down into the bucket, or into the
> > left channel. They ask you to "just look." So they can see it, but not
> tell
> > it. Similarly, in ecological field work, the participants could see
> > differences but not tell them, that is see that something is not a rock
> pile
> > even though the definition of a rock pile said it was one.
> >>
> >>
> >> How do you describe or name what they see as difference but for which
> > there is no concept, no "notion" to name and tell the difference? In such
> > cases, "percept" may well do the trick. There are two percepts, they are
> > different, yet there are no cultural-historical concepts to name,
> theorize,
> > conceptualize . . .
> >>
> >> As you see from the title of one paper, I used the term "perceptual
> > gestalts" . . . . Don't know whether that resolves your problem, but was
> > useful and the best solution for me.
> >>
> >>
> >> Roth, W.-M. (2005). Making classifications (at) work: Ordering practices
> > in science. Social Studies of Science, 35, 581-621.
> >> Roth, W.-M. (2004). Perceptual gestalts in workplace communication.
> > Journal of Pragmatics, 36(6), 1037-1069.
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Michael
> >>
> >> On 2010-07-09, at 3:43 PM, Martin Packer wrote:
> >>
> >> "Describe" in what respect, Michael?
> >>
> >> On Jul 9, 2010, at 4:01 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth wrote:
> >>
> >>> Martin, the percept might describe the forms that appear in perception?
> > What do you think? Michael
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 2010-07-09, at 9:46 AM, Martin Packer wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Eric,
> >>>
> >>> For me, the question that needs to be answered is why we need to
> > introduce a new term, "percept." We can all talk about 'perception,' as
> an
> > active process of interaction with the world, right? What is gained when
> we
> > start to talk about 'percepts,' as though there are some little entities
> > floating around somewhere? Haven't we turned a process into an entity?
> >>>
> >>> The university has a good selection of DVDs, and I recently checked out
> > the first season of the cable TV channel Showtime's series The Tudors,
> which
> > recounts how Henry VIII's need for a male heir led to the rupture between
> > England and the Catholic Church. It's not exactly aiming for historical
> > accuracy, but I was then motivated to check out Elton's history of the
> > period and it turns out the series does a pretty good job of touching on
> > most of the important events.
> >>>
> >>> Everyone in the show is a fashion statement, including Cardinal Wolsey
> > who, as played by Sam Neil, is both cunning and likable. He shows up each
> > time in a different outfit, wearing a variety of official headgear, each
> in
> > that rich cardinal red.
> >>>
> >>> One morning I was fixing breakfast and reached out for the salt shaker.
> > It's made of transparent plastic with a lid, something we picked up at
> the
> > supermarket. But the lid is bright red, and (and here's the point; thanks
> > for your patience!) as I picked it up, for a second or two what I saw was
> a
> > little cardinal.
> >>>
> >>> That seems to me a nice example of what Mike has been exploring, the
> > active and ongoing character of perception, in which conceiving and
> > perceiving are intimately linked. I see the object *through* and *in
> terms*
> > of a concept (though we're still none to sure what that is!), in this
> case
> > the concept of cardinal that had been enriched by watching the TV show.
> The
> > process is not entirely within me as an individual, because the salt
> shaker
> > did its part.
> >>>
> >>> To me, saying that I "have" a "percept" doesn't help me understand this
> > process. The percept would be -  what, a little red cardinal? or is the
> > percept the salt shaker, and I impose a concept of cardinal on it? but
> isn't
> > 'salt shaker' a concept too?? Putting all of this stuff inside the
> > individual leads to an infinite regress, not a satisfactory explanation
> (or
> > even description) of what is going on.
> >>>
> >>> Martin
> >>>
> >>> On Jul 9, 2010, at 10:43 AM, ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Percept would be preference?  I don't know exactly but people do not
> >>>> operate upon appropriated concepts 100% of the time.  Do they?
> > Certainly
> >>>> children do not.  Currently I am not exactly sure what the question is
> >>>> that needs to be answered.
> >>>>
> >>>> Perhaps the percept in the 'not-wanting-to-listen-to-dylan" for me
> > would
> >>>> be I would prefer listening to the radio seeing as he never gets any
> > air
> >>>> time or perhaps it would be that I am stuck inside of mobile with the
> >>>> memphis blues again?
> >>>>
> >>>> That certainly is a great question.  Others with
> >>>> thoughts/percepts/concepts?
> >>>>
> >>>> eric
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> From:   Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu>
> >>>> To:     "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >>>> Date:   07/09/2010 09:14 AM
> >>>> Subject:        Re: [xmca] perception/conception etc
> >>>> Sent by:        xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> OK, Eric let's suppose you woke up this morning not wanting to listen
> > to
> >>>> Dylan. What is the percept in that situation? Dylan? His music? Your
> >>>> temporary dislike? The fact that yesterday you felt differently?
> >>>>
> >>>> Martin
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jul 9, 2010, at 8:04 AM, ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Martin:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I understand your misgivings about placing construction within but
> >>>> perhaps
> >>>>> this makes sense:  concepts are appropriated from the social/cultural
> >>>>> arena but percepts are individually based.  My percepts about music
> > may
> >>>>> run counter to yours and there are even days I don't want to listen
> to
> >>>> Bob
> >>>>> Dylan.  However, I have an appropriated concept of music that is
> >>>> probably
> >>>>> extremely similar to yours.  Does this make sense?  I know this
> >>>>> internal/exteranl debate has raged for years and won't end anytime
> > soon
> >>>>> but some things do indeed happen within.  I still have to think
> though
> >>>>> that cracking this code between everyday and scietific could assist
> in
> >>>>> understanding human development.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> eric
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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