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

Re: [xmca] Fernando Rey's exploration of "sense"

Unfortunately I don't usually understand your messages though I try always to read them through , long and continuous as they are . My ignorance might be the cause for all this ; However the "desire" will never get extinguished .
My support here comes from Martin's writing which happily smacks of the "Activity Theory" . 
Practical activity FORMS a social context ; The SOCIAL CONTEXT constructs the PERSON . We have this in Marx's thesis 1 , too . We cannot leave Nature , the outside world , things external to us , reality , pure , intact , untouched , to themselves and claim things , processes , phenomena being objective . We should take them SUBJECTIVELY . This SUBJECTIVELY or SUBJECTNESS is not what we mean by "ideally" or "mentally" . It's the SENSUOUS ACTIVITY OF THE SUBJECT WITH NATURE . 
It's quite acceptable then that "culture" , "language" are born within or out of this process . 
And if we believe in "dialectics" , it's quite certain that , in a reverse trend , language and culture are employed to operationalize the things of reality . And I suppose it's on this reverse trend that you are discussing the change of the KIND of person you mean . On behalf of Martin , you begin with the initiation of the process of even constructing person through PRACTICAL ACTIVITY but end in such a jargon as if the differntiation of people has its roots in "desires" , "ideas" , "culture" . Then the whole problem is : NOT to detach the "secondaries" from the "primaries" , say , THE BASE . Language serves us profoundly when it is detached from what it signifies ; however , it's not the navel which could be cut off once for ever . 
If you say kinds of persons come or are constructed from diversion of "ideas" , first I say yes . But promptly I add "ideas" do not come from genes or null . Culture never gets perfect independence or for ever fixed because it's the sedimentation , reification , accumulation of the products of the experiences of the PRACTICAL ACTIVITY . 
In 5 below and with the bolded word CONTRADICTARY demands and the "split" therefrom , A.N. Leontiev long ago exposed and disentangled the knot by his definitions of the "social meaning" and "persoanl meaning" . 
And 6 below : Yes , through "personal meaning" a person searches for his/her identity and character formation . Again we should be aware always of the birthplace of these two kinds of meaning . 
And again , Yes , the attitude formed in relations of recognition CONSTRUCTS the KIND of person society needs to raise . Person generally and predominantly exposed to Capitalist Instruction and Schooling cannot fully differentiate between Master and Slave . She boasts of her dear country's superjets and heavy bombardmensts over people's Land of Libya leveling it to a handful of dirt and dust leaving freedom-loving people in wonder if oil is behind the curtain or a dictator corpse . 

From: Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2011 9:00 AM
Subject: [xmca] Fernando Rey's exploration of "sense"

The word "sense" is a KEY word in Fernando's article.

I want to bring in Martin's notion of "ontological tropes" as a way to
reflect on this key term in his exploration of the ontology of learning. He
suggests that six themes or six different ontological tropes that account
for an understanding of learning as a change of the KIND of person as well
as a change in the structuring of knowledge.
1) the person is constructed [RE-constructed]
2) in a social context
3) formed through practical activity.

Martin suggests these 3 themes are well developed within the exploration of
learning as a change of the person.  However, it is the next 3 themes which
I believe can be elaborated to deepen Fernando's notion of "sense".

4) Formed in relationships of desire & RECOGNITION [this is where I believe
John Shotter's writings add depth to the conversation]
5)that can split the person [schools emphasize on "abstraction" and
objectivication as ways of knowing make CONTRADICTORY demands and create a
split in our experience of "sense".
6)MOTIVATING [moving] the search for identity and character formation.  The
child as "student" MUST RESPOND ACTIVELY in either alighnment or
opposition.  What we call ATTITUDE is THIS ACTIVE STANCE towards the
institutional situation of development. This stance IS an ontologically
DETERMINATIVE stance.  Schooling is ALWAYS ABOUT "attitude" formed in
relations of recognition.

It is these last 3 themes of the SUBJECTIVE aspect of our development as
persons that the term "sense" is exploring.

What do others think?

xmca mailing list
xmca mailing list