These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes, and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving. Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards. If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site, please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.

These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes, and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving. Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards. If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site, please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] Dialogue on Concepts Part 1 Released!



I think the Tolman article speaks to your query about volition and
motivation, Monica.

I am having trouble distinguishing distanciation, de-centering, distancing.
All are used in various developmental traditions.

mike

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Monica Hansen <
monica.hansen@vandals.uidaho.edu> wrote:

> All,
> Point of information:
> Can someone elucidate the terms "motivation" and "volition" in the context
> of our discussion. What is the distinction?
>
> For example, Larry uses "volitional" in his response below,
>
> the volitional capacity to engage various "perspectives of
> distanciation" from the immediate concrete moment to the most "abstract" -
> distanciated from the concrete - systematic concepts.
>
> What type of impetus is required for something to be classified as
> "motivation" as opposed to "volition"? It seems as though the simple
> definitions in a common dictionary would suggest the distinction between
> them as a varying degree of conscious agency? Is this consistent with your
> point here, Larry?
>
> Monica
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> Behalf Of Larry Purss
> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 9:48 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Dialogue on Concepts Part 1 Released!
>
> Paula, David, Mike [and Andy & others developing the Vimeo site]
>
> What a powerful medium for clarifying and extending the CHAT dialogues.
> A few quick comments that are more impressionistic on this very educational
> video presentation and elaboration of concept formation.
>
> David, your historically situating the shift from chapter 5's account to
> the
> chapter 6 account as embedded in Stalin's draconian approach to education
> and the radical shift in the way  pedagogy was required to be presented
> gives a deeper context to the evolving theory.  The metaphor of the globe
> -moving from concrete to abstract- as a process of increasing
> "distanciation" as a more "general" way of discussing heaps, complexes,
> psuedoconcepts, true concepts, and scientific concepts is very helpful to
> orient my understanding of these ideas.
>
> Mike, your elaborating the notion of "scientific systems of concept
> formation" as not universal but evloving from INSTRUCTION within SCHOOL
> settings and questioning if there are other ways of formulating systematic
> theories that are cultural but not situated within schooling links up with
> hermeneutical conceptions of "traditions" as formations of systematic
> concept development [and also social representations from Moscovici].
> Schooling develops traditions of increasing "distanciation" but still
> leaves
> open the central question of "layering" As we coordinate and move within
> the
> latitude and longitude of the concrete-abstract configuration is it a
> linear
> progression of transcendence "over" the concrete [mastery & control] or is
> it more a formation of increasing coordination of complexity on "the globe"
> and the volitional capacity to engage various "perspectives of
> distanciation" from the immediate concrete moment to the most "abstract" -
> distanciated from the concrete - systematic concepts.
>
> Chapter 5 p.133 "transition from UNMEDIATED intellectual processes to
> operations mediated by signs" [Mead's significant SHARED symbols]  I think
> this concept is a central notion to be elaborated and critiqued. My
> understanding of "mediation" would include David Kellogg's "2nd  moment" of
> development of the concept.  The nonvolitional affective "movement between
> actual persons" IS "mediational"  [mediated by OTHERS] and seems to be
> foundational for developing concepts. This affective realm, which in some
> accounts would be theorized as "unmediated by signs", seems to be a
> critical
> MOMENT in development. The reason I like the term "distanciated" as a way
> of
> understanding the coordination of concrete-abstract perspectives is it does
> not bias the "scientific concepts" over everyday concepts or cognition as
> separation of affect from thought.  Distanciation "as a tool" which comes
> increasingly under volitional control as perspectives are developing
> increasing complexity recognizes the centrality of mediating the
> development
> of a "communal self" that can NEGOTIATE and COORDINATE subjective and
> INTERSUBJECTIVE perspectives which are experienced as more or less concrete
> or abstract but does not privilege one perspective as more "true".
>
> Last point.  "scientific concepts" as a particular "system of
> distanciation"
> which exists within a particular hermeneutical "tradition" and expands our
> "horizon of understanding" is maybe the most powerful tool we have yet
> developed for coordinating and systematizing our concepts but it is still a
> particular historically developed tradition [which develops particular
> kinds
> of persons] Schools, as institutions, structure and systematize the
> development of this tool for distanciating from the immediate visual field
> BUT it is within historical  circumstances that  "hermeneutical
> traditions" as  systems of social relations and systematized scientific
> concepts evolve. Ontological development "and systematic conceptions of
> "self" and "subjectivity" emerge within these horizons of understanding
> [which must be systematic and regulated in order to exist as particular
> perspectives on "reality" [perspectival realism].  These "tradititions" are
> mediated by significant symbols [concepts] which are systems of concepts.
> These systems may be more or less "distanciated" from the concrete
> immediate
> moment BUT even in the most "advanced" scientifically informed
> societies experience is a dynamic process of movement between the
> "coordinates on the globe"
>
> Once again, thank you for producing this very informative video [which in
> combination with the conversation on CHAT has been successful in helping me
> coordinate multiple perspectives to deepen my understanding of
> "developmental psychology" as a "system  of thinking and concept
> formation".
>
>
> Larry
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Paula M Towsey
> <paulat@johnwtowsey.co.za>wrote:
>
> > Part One of the *Dialogue on Concepts*, a collaborative presentation
> > initiated by Andy Blunden, has now been released and is open for
> > discussion.
> > XMCAers are invited to view it at:
> >
> > http://vimeo.com/groups/39473/videos/13550409
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________
> > Paula M Towsey
> > PhD Candidate: Universiteit Leiden
> > Faculty of Social Sciences
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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