Re: [xmca] schools-without-computers-by-choice-and-conviction-that-they-dont-help-kids

[Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>]

On 14 November 2011 05:53, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> wrote:

> [...]
>
All I'm saying is that it is worth acknowledging the hard empirical,
> theoretical, (statistical?), inductive and deductive knowledge that these
> working class kids have. But it is knowledge FOR a particular task of
> "getting by" (just like the enlightened intellectual's knowledge is good
> for addressing questions on a larger scale). The lads' ability to "have a
> laff" is important and complex kind of knowledge. It speaks to a hard
> reality that exists just as much as something like "class" exists (these
> are the kinds of fantasies that I was pointing to in my last email, but
> I'll let that go and assume for the purposes of this email they are real).
> The privileging of one over the other seems to me to be rather unfortunate
> (some folks call this "symbolic violence" - I'm not disposed to go that
> far).
>

It seems perfectly sensible to me to mark symbols as being derived from
sources of different rigour, and proximity to interactions of the
non-symbolic, when they are.  I wouldn't call that privileging though.


>
> This is an old conversation so I don't suspect that I'll get anywhere with
> it here. But it has been good to think through it with you.
>

No problem, Greg.
Huw


> Best,
> greg
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > On 13 November 2011 00:40, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > What is there in social life that we can talk about that is not
> > "fantasy"?
> > >
> >
> > Knowledge.  Empirical, theoretical, statistical, inductive and
> deductive...
> >
> >
> > >
> > > And, connecting to the other thread, is "alienation" fantasy? (maybe
> more
> > > of a phantasmagoria? (to play with Marx's camera obscura metaphor a
> > bit)).
> > >
> >
> > I'd say no.  Though we can see how one can encourage the other.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > -greg
> > > p.s. for those interested in what I'm after here, I'm trying to cut a
> > path
> > > between Marx's humanism and Max Stirner's nihilism - to recognize the
> > > importance of "fantasy" (something that seems to have no place in
> Marx's
> > > thinking) without falling into a subjective idealism (where Stirner
> ends
> > > up). Walking a razor's edge?
> > >
> >
> > I'd say it was the contents of the thinking that make it fantasy.  The
> > psychological process, tempered with a willingness to check/try out ones
> > ideas, can be fruitful and is not necessarily something I'd classify as
> > fantasy.
> >
> > Huw
> >
> >
> > > On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 12 November 2011 20:48, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Huw,
> > > > >
> > > > > I get the basic idea of where you are coming from with this. I'm
> > > familiar
> > > > > with Paul Willis' use of the unfortunate term "penetrations" in his
> > > book
> > > > > Learning to Labo(u)r. It is quite similar to Bourdieu's notion of
> > being
> > > > > able to see through ideology and into the "real" relations between
> > > things
> > > > > (my scare quotes around real). I see both Willis and Bourdieu as
> > > > developing
> > > > > Marxist ideas.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I don't recall coming across the phrase in literature, so be assured
> I
> > > > wasn't using it as term.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Having said that, I still have some concerns (aside from the
> > > unfortunate
> > > > > term "penetrations"). My concern is that there is a posited "real"
> > that
> > > > the
> > > > > critical critic has available to them that is not available to
> others
> > > > > (maybe we would say that he has the intellectual "equipment" to
> > > > "penetrate"
> > > > > reality). I don't have a problem with the idea that the critical
> > critic
> > > > has
> > > > > a different and useful perspective on things, I just don't agree
> that
> > > we
> > > > > should speak of this in terms of a better grasp of reality.
> > > > >
> > > > > Instead, I would say that the critical critic has a better
> > perspective
> > > > FOR
> > > > > some particular ends. But I'm not convinced that it is necessarily
> > > > because
> > > > > their perspective is "more real" or closer to reality. It depends
> on
> > > what
> > > > > reality, and what for.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Perspectives is 'more real'" reads like a typological error to me.
> >  The
> > > > means of representing perspectives are inherently real, by virtue of
> > > their
> > > > being represented.  It is the truthfulness of the existence of the
> > > > realities they represent which is the point.   The representation of
> a
> > > > fantasy is very real, but the thing pointed to by this representation
> > is
> > > > not, it is questionable, and this questioning entails the logic of
> > > > truthfulness.  Likewise the 'very real effect' of a fantasy does not
> > > refer
> > > > to the reality of the thing pointed to by the fantasy, it refers to
> the
> > > > real effect of a real representation.
> > > >
> > > > Huw
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Elsewhere Bourdieu notes that misrecognition ("misknowing" - i.e.,
> > > > > meconnaissance) is absolutely essential to social life.
> > Misrecognition
> > > is
> > > > > at the heart of meaning - without it we encounter a meaningless,
> > > lifeless
> > > > > world. So I'd suggest that it is better to be honest about our
> > > > shortcomings
> > > > > when it comes to reality. Better to ask what a given way of
> "seeing"
> > is
> > > > > good for. What does it allow us to see and do?
> > > > >
> > > > > -greg
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Huw Lloyd <
> > huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
> > > > > >wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 27 October 2011 22:14, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 27 October 2011 20:56, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On 27 October 2011 20:47, Greg Thompson <
> > > greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > > > > > >wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> Huw,
> > > > > > >>> Is reality really something to be "penetrated."
> > > > > > >>> -greg
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> If you wish to get from one side of a city to another, there
> are
> > > > > finite
> > > > > > >> ways of doing so using conventional transport.  If you wish to
> > > > > > articulate
> > > > > > >> that intention in terms of a particular route, you will have
> to
> > > > > mentally
> > > > > > >> penetrate the fog of obstacles from A to B prior to an
> accurate
> > > > > > >> articulation.  Does 'penetrating to reality' sound better?
> > > >  Hopefully
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >> gist is clear.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > ... but that also the intention successfully acted upon is a
> > change
> > > > and
> > > > > > > thereby a form of penetrating reality.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > I thought this loose-end might be helpful.  Bourdieu, in
> > > 'Distinction'
> > > > > > p387, expressed this aspect:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "What the relation to 'mass' (and, a fortiori, 'elite') cultural
> > > > products
> > > > > > reproduces, reactivates and reinforces is not the monotony of the
> > > > > > production line or office but social relation which underlies
> > > > > working-class
> > > > > > experience of the world, whereby his labour and the product of
> his
> > > > > labour,
> > > > > > opus proprium, present themselves to the worker as opus alienum,
> > > > > > 'alienated' labour.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > i.e. the difference between a participatory, intentionally
> > > influential
> > > > > > relation and a passive one.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Huw
> > > > > > __________________________________________
> > > > > > _____
> > > > > > xmca mailing list
> > > > > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > > > > Sanford I. Berman Post-Doctoral Scholar
> > > > > Department of Communication
> > > > > University of California, San Diego
> > > > > __________________________________________
> > > > > _____
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > > Sanford I. Berman Post-Doctoral Scholar
> > > Department of Communication
> > > University of California, San Diego
> > > __________________________________________
> > > _____
> > > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> Sanford I. Berman Post-Doctoral Scholar
> Department of Communication
> University of California, San Diego
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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