Re: [xmca] Tom Toolery - tool and result

[mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>]

 A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates
it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

 Antoine de Saint-Exupery<http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/antoinedes161736.html>

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

> Martin, it is true that "artefact" is being used "in two different ways"  -
> as Lois Holzman says, as both tool and result.
> But this is not just a question of ambiguous words or double meanings.
> Tool and result, product and mediator, is a *dialectical pair*. It is what
> is involved in being drawn into human society. It is essentially two sides
> of the same coin.
>
> Consider the North Star. In what sense is it a product of labour? It is a
> material thing; us people in the Southern hemisphere don't have a South Star
> and we have to make do with poor substitutes. We can't invent a South Star.
>
> Andy
>
> Martin Packer wrote:
>
>> Andy, Lucas, Carol...
>>
>> It seems to me we're using the term 'artifact' in two related but
>> distinguishable ways. First, to say that something is a product of human
>> activity, rathe than solely natural processes. Second, to say that something
>> mediates human activity.
>> I think a plausible case can be made that the human body is an artifact in
>> both senses. The NYTimes article I sent recently illustrates that past
>> cultural activity has shaped the form and functioning of the human body
>> today. Lactose tolerance, which sadly I lack, was a mutation that conveyed
>> advantage to those carrying it once farming and milking of cattle became
>> widespread, and so it became increasingly common. Those of you who today
>> drink milk and eat cheese have bodies are the products of our ancestors'
>> activities in the milk shed.
>> But, second, the human body can surely mediate human activity, as Marx
>> described clearly. When I sell my labor power I am contributing my body as a
>> mediator between capital and commodity. A less sobering example would be the
>> developmental stage of the Great-We, when the infant needs and uses the
>> bodies of adults to get anything accomplished. The first gestures and
>> holophrastic utterances are calls for others to act on the infant's behalf,
>> doing what his or her own body is not yet capable of.
>>
>> Martin
>>  On Oct 16, 2010, at 5:27 AM, Lucas Bietti wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Andy,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the remark and my apologies if I was not clear enough. I
>>> understand
>>> your point about the historicity and cultural and social trajectories of
>>> artifacts and I agree on that. What I was suggesting was that gesturing
>>> could be
>>> an activity in which the body would act as an artifact without counting
>>> on
>>> external devices -if we claim that *the body is an artifact*. I was
>>> wondering
>>> how the mind-body unity and necessary interanimations would be operating
>>> in
>>> dreaming?
>>>
>>> Lucas
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On October 16, 2010 at 4:51 AM Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Lucas,
>>>> I think the distributed mind idea emphasises certain aspects of human
>>>> life, namely the involvement of *other people* in the production of
>>>> artefacts and participation in institutions and other forms of social
>>>> practice. But it should be remembered that an artefact is typically the
>>>> product of *other people* working in institutions; as Hegel said: "the
>>>> tool is the norm of labour." So both ideas are making the same claim but
>>>> with slightly different emphasis.
>>>>
>>>> But when you say "if we believe that the body is crucial for perception
>>>> and cognition, ..." surely this is not up for debate? And yet you seem
>>>> to be suggesting that the body might not be needed for cognition and
>>>> consequently, the body might not be an artefact. I'm really lost here.
>>>> :)
>>>>
>>>> Andy
>>>> Lucas Bietti wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Carol and Andy,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as I know, the point of the extended mind/distributed cognition
>>>>> approach
>>>>> is the idea that in many cases cognitive processes are
>>>>> extended/distributed
>>>>> across social and material environments. So in writing both the pencil
>>>>> and
>>>>> paper
>>>>> are acting as mediating interfaces enabling us to perform certain
>>>>> cognitive
>>>>> tasks (e.g. basic math operations) that, otherwise, we would not be
>>>>> able to
>>>>> perform.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Extended and distributed approaches to the mind don't consider the body
>>>>> as
>>>>> an
>>>>> artifact. The basis for the these approaches is that cognitive
>>>>> processes are
>>>>> embodied and situated in concrete activities. That's why cognitive and
>>>>> sensory-motor interanimations are part of the same mind-body unity.
>>>>> Gesturing
>>>>> can be thought as a cognitive-embodied activity in which the body acts
>>>>> as an
>>>>> artifact to represent and convey meaning. In gesturing the mediating
>>>>> interface
>>>>> is the space. However, if we believe that the body is crucial for
>>>>> perception
>>>>> and
>>>>> cognition, in my view, there would be no reason to claim that the body
>>>>> is an
>>>>> artifact -or I missed something of the discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Lucas
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On October 16, 2010 at 3:13 AM Carol Macdonald <carolmacdon@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>> In a small and trembling voice, 'cos we don't want to get into
>>>>>> dualisms
>>>>>> here--surely artefacts mediate with other artefacts--the pencil
>>>>>> mediates
>>>>>> writing? I don't feel I am in the right league to answer this
>>>>>> questions,
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> I think we are pushed back to this position.
>>>>>> Carol
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16 October 2010 08:33, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Understood, and an interesting example it was too. I was just trying
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>> back to Paula's interesting question which started the thread.
>>>>>>> Jenna got a thread going on the blind person's cane, where that part
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> mind which is in artefacts become completely subsumed into the body,
>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> psychological point of view. Paula then pointed out that from a
>>>>>>> psychological point of view we can take parts of our body to be
>>>>>>> tools.
>>>>>>> So the question is raised: psychologically speaking, where is the
>>>>>>> border
>>>>>>> line between body and things?
>>>>>>> Lucas added the idea of "distributed cognition" so that the activity
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> other people is seen also to be a part of mind.
>>>>>>> But, and I think this is an challenging one: if the human body is an
>>>>>>> artefact, what is it mediating between?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Carol Macdonald wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Actually Andy
>>>>>>>> I thought I was giving an historically interesting example.  Maybe
>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>> because we have 350 000+ people a year dying from AIDS that health
>>>>>>>> is so
>>>>>>>> high in our national consciousness. So excuse the example: you are
>>>>>>>> lucky
>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>> didn't get an historical account of HIV/AIDS!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Raising children is also interesting across the cultures in our
>>>>>>>> country.
>>>>>>>> But
>>>>>>>> I have work to do so must stop here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Carol
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 16 October 2010 02:44, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We shouldn't take this "the body is an artefact" down an entirely
>>>>>>>>> negative
>>>>>>>>> line of course, Carol.
>>>>>>>>> Every parent will tell you the efforts that went into raising their
>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>> darling children.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Carol Macdonald wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> TB is very interesting historically in the way we have responded
>>>>>>>>>> to it.
>>>>>>>>>> Firstly, you got ill from it and died from it, like the poet
>>>>>>>>>> Keats.
>>>>>>>>>>   Then
>>>>>>>>>> people were isolated in sanatoria and given drugs and then they
>>>>>>>>>> recovered.
>>>>>>>>>> And now, you are infectious until you start taking your
>>>>>>>>>> medication, and
>>>>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>>>> if you faithfully take it, then you get better. And most recently,
>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> likely to get TB as an opportunistic infection when you are HIV+,
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>> harder to shake off because your immune system is compromised.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Recently my niece had a group of friends round for supper and then
>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>> diagnosed with TB the following day.  She had to inform everybody,
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>> had to be checked, but within 48 hours, when she was on medicine,
>>>>>>>>>> she
>>>>>>>>>> didn't
>>>>>>>>>> have to tell/warn anybody. Astonishing for someone who regularly
>>>>>>>>>> swims
>>>>>>>>>> 5km
>>>>>>>>>> before breakfast!! If she had been Keats, her symptoms would have
>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>> than a slight cough at night.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> carol
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 15 October 2010 14:42, Leif Strandberg <
>>>>>>>>>> leifstrandberg.ab@telia.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and TB
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is Karin Johanisson (Prof in Medical History, Univ of Uppsala,
>>>>>>>>>>> Sweden)
>>>>>>>>>>> translated...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> her books are really interesting
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Leif
>>>>>>>>>>> 15 okt 2010 kl. 14.26 skrev Martin Packer:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>   Lactose intolerance - just one example of cultural continuation
>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> biological evolution...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>> <Wade 2010 Human Culture, an Evolutionary Force.pdf>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 15, 2010, at 5:22 AM, Andy Blunden wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>   I am intrigued Rod. You conclude from this interesting story
>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> body is not ("may not be") an artefact, but "virtual maps"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> within
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> brain
>>>>>>>>>>>>> are? I presume because these neural structures are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "constructed,"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> whereas
>>>>>>>>>>>>> other parts of the body are not?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you mean?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rod Parker-Rees wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In 'The body has a mind of its own' by Sandra Blakeslee and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthew
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Blakeslee (2007 Random House), there is a chapter which begins
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> account of research by Dr Atsushi Iriki and colleagues in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Japan.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> research involved training monkeys to use rakes as tools to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> retrieve
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> food
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and then using arrays of microelectrodes implanted in their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skulls
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> study
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the visual receptive fields of visual-tactile cells in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> posterior
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parietal cortex of the monkeys. What Iriki found was that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> visual-tactile cells, which usually responded to information
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> region within the monkeys' arms length, began to respond to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> distant
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information (within arm+rake's length) but ONLY when the monky
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rake as a tool - when the mankey was passively holding the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> response
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> drew back to its normal range. The chapter goes on to describe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> studies
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> virtual reality in which participants learn to control avatars
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strikingly different physiology - e.g. a lobster - controlled
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> complex
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code of combined body movements which is never shared with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> participants,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they learn to control the movement of their avatar just by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but they soon become able to 'automate' the process - focusing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to do rather on what they have to do to do it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Our bodies may not be artefacts but our cerebellar virtual
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maps of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our bodies work and what we can do with them surely are.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have just started wearing varifocal glasses and am in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> process
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> retraining my body's ways of seeing (learning to move my head
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neck
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rather than just move my eyes) already I am finding that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'stay
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> focus' more as my head and neck get my eyes into position
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to tell them where to go!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For me this links with the discussion about bodies and tools
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possibly extends (rake-like) beyond it - how much of the tool
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defined by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its form and how much by the cultural history of how, by whom,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and for what it has been and could be used?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All the best,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rod
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: 15 October 2010 06:02
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Tom Toolery
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My claim is, David, not just that (for example) my fingers are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> functionally artefacts because I use them to play the piano,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are genetically artefacts because they are the products of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> art.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Labour
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> created man himself" as old Fred said. If we are going to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinking is artefact-mediated activity, then we must accept
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bodies
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> artefacts, or abandon other important definitions of artefact,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mediator
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of activity, material product of human labour and the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> substance of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> culture.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We fashion our bodies for the purpose of constructing a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> culture
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> surely as we fashion our buildings, our domestic animals, our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> food
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clothing and everything else.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can define a word how you like, but the importance of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> realising
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our bodies are products of human labour which we use as both
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instruments and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> symbols, just like our white canes and spectacles,  is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> demonstrated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intersubjectivists who simply overlook the role of artefacts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mediators
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> altogether. In part this is possible because they subsume the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> human
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> body
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into the notion of 'subject', something which also allows them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scoot over
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all sorts of tricky philosophical problems entailed in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recognizing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> active participation of subjectivity in what would otherwise
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simply
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> complex series of material interactions. The result,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contradictorily
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> far worse Cartesian dualism than the one they tried to avoid.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, I thought long and hard about this, and the conclusion is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inescapable: the human body is an artefact.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> / //// /
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David Kellogg wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   Sometimes I would really like to be a mosquito in the room
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is giving his course on developmental psychology. But I would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> probably want
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to bite the student who asked if the replacement of social
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relations
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language (e.g. discourse) by psychological ones (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> grammar) is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "fact"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or just one of Martin's ideas; the question strikes me as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rather
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bumbling and humbling.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fortunately, I have my own Thursday night session, which this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> semester
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is all about systemic functional linguistics and conversation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> analysis. Last
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> night we were discussing the difference between them, and I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pointed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the systemic view is quite consistent with the idea of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> artefact and the conversation analysis view is much less so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take, for example, the problem of repair. A teacher walks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> classroom.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: Good morning, everybody.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ss: Good morning, everybody!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: !!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The conversation is broken. But in order to repair it, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> teacher
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not pull over and stop. The teacher has to keep going. The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> teacher
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find out what exactly the kids mean, if anything (are they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simply
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repeating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what they heard, as seems likely, or are they including their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> classmates in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their reply to the teacher?)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This means that even quite simple conversations (the sort we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> third graders) are quite gnarly and knobbled; they have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> convolutions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> introvolutions, knots and whorls and burls of negotiation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   Conversations
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exhibit very few of the genetic or structural of mechanical
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tools,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fact only resemble "tools" only if we take a quite narrowly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> functionalist
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> squint and presuppose a coinciding will that wields them. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me that they are misconstrued when we say that they are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> artefacts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the Romantics, especially Herder, would agree with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think they would have been rather horrified at Andy's idea
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> body is an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> artefact in the same sense as a tool is an artefact.  They
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that it is not genetically so; the body is a natural product
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> man
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> made. It is also not structurally so: unlike other artefacts,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure reflects self-replication and not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other-fabrication.  Of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> course,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we may say that a body is FUNCTIONALLY like an artefact,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as a tool in various ways. But if we privilege this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particular
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interpretation of the body over the genetic, or the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structural,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> account, it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems to me we get a pretty functionalist view of things. A
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> body
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a conversation is not an artefact; it's more like a work of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> art,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gratuitous and organic complexity of conversation is an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> indelible
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sign of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David Kellogg
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seoul National University of Education
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- On Thu, 10/14/10, Paula M Towsey <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paulat@johnwtowsey.co.za>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Paula M Towsey <paulat@johnwtowsey.co.za>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: RE: [xmca] Tom Toolery
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net, "'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Thursday, October 14, 2010, 5:40 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Andy-of-the-5-o'clock-shadow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yet it's a different kind of gnashing of teeth (and wailing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weeping)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when the baboons at Third Bridge get stuck into the tinned
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supplies...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paula
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paula M Towsey
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PhD Candidate: Universiteit Leiden
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Faculty of Social Sciences
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Behalf Of Andy Blunden
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: 14 October 2010 13:19
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Tom Toolery
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My answer, Paula: yes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My body, with its various parts, is an artefact; according to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> context,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> symbol or tool.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My face and my 5 o'clock shadow is a symbol just as much as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shirt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wear. My teeth a tool just as much as a can opener.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paula M Towsey wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   For some inexplicable reason while watching Mike's blind
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> man
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stick video, I remembered smsing Carol with a quirky
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question: if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> researcher without a knife is trying to open an airline
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> packet of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> peanuts,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and she resorts to using her teeth, what tool is she using?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Though, perhaps the better question would be - is she using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool.?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Home Page:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/><
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/><
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Videos: http://vimeo.com/user3478333/videos
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/scss
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Home Page:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/><
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/><
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/><
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Videos: http://vimeo.com/user3478333/videos
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/scss
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>>>>>>> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/<http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/><
>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> <
>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
>>>>>>>>> Videos: http://vimeo.com/user3478333/videos
>>>>>>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/scss
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>>>>> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/<http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/><
>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
>>>>>>> Videos: http://vimeo.com/user3478333/videos
>>>>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/scss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> WORK as:
>>>>>> Visiting Lecturer
>>>>>> Wits School of Education
>>>>>> HOME (please use these details)
>>>>>> 6 Andover Road
>>>>>> Westdene
>>>>>> Johannesburg 2092
>>>>>> +27 (0)11 673 9265   +27 (0)82 562 1050
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Lucas M. Bietti
>>>>> Macquarie University
>>>>> Universitat Pompeu Fabra
>>>>>
>>>>> lucas@bietti.org
>>>>> www.collectivememory.net
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
>>>> Videos: http://vimeo.com/user3478333/videos
>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/scss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Lucas M. Bietti
>>> Macquarie University
>>> Universitat Pompeu Fabra
>>>
>>> lucas@bietti.org
>>> www.collectivememory.net
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> Videos: http://vimeo.com/user3478333/videos
> Book: http://www.brill.nl/scss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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