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

Re: [xmca] Polls are closed: Manfred Holodynsk's article is choice

Helena, I am trying to make the point that a person's motivation, and thus their emotions, must be understood in terms of their commitment to a project (or activity) or more than one (possibly in conflict) or even none at all (a pathological condition discussed by Vasilyuk), rather than some personal condition which is qualitatively different from "the" activity which is, by (Manfred's) definition, oriented to a *societal meaning*.
"Societal" is a perfectly legitmate word, btw Helena, and commonly used in such contexts, although it is ambiguous. It could relate to a general medium or domain called "society" (in which things are done) or it could relate to "a society" (which does things), ie., a specific social formation such as a nation-state. The ambiguity is part of the issue I have with its use in European versions of AT. In Soviet days there could be no distinction.
On "general" and "universal", I have to apologise. On reflection I have found that this was a diversion on my part. "General" means ":in common to all" whilst "universal" applies to "the whole", but it was, I now see, really an irrelevant distinction here. 

Does that help?
Andy

Helena Worthen wrote:

Andy  and Carol:

So the "object" here is the outburst, and it's contested because it is
perceived very differently by onlookers, managers and the woman herself?

I don't understand the difference between *general* meaning and *universal*
Helena 
On 3/30/13 10:26 PM, "Andy Blunden" <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:


Words, and the concepts they are signs for, do tend, as you suggest, to
(1) Become institutionalised, so that they form part of a common fund of
knowledge. This happens through the material objectification of the
concept (in building toilets), the practical objectificationof the
concepts (in using them in one way and not another, and only them) and
the symbolic and semantic objectification (in signage and texts of all
kinds), and (2) Gradually change over time, in a given community, and

>from one community to another, or from one subcultural group to another,

due to changes in these forms of objectification. But to look at the
*general* meaning of a symbol or tool or other artifact, we obscure the
importance of what is *universal*. This only becomes an issue if, rather
than taking ordinary objects as our paradigm for concepts and the
objects of activity, we take precisely objects which are contested,
controversial and/or changing. This is what we should do.

So, for example, let us supposed that the bank-employee in Manfred's
example is female. We can see a possible explanation for her actions in
the fact that she is committed to feminism. In this case her outburst is
far from being a personal, idiosyncratic expression, but is actually a
self-conscious action taken against a bullying male boss, an action
subsumed within the project (or activity) known as feminism, or "the
women's movement."

The result may well be changing the title of her job, for example, from
secretary to office manager, because, as Vygotsky said, "the concept [of
secretary] had become worn out."

Andy

carolmacdon@gmail.com wrote:

Is it possible that this is simply "common" understanding which is
negotiated again and again and is subject to change over long periods
like the work "toilet" which has changed time and again over the period
of centuries. 
Carol
Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you!

-----Original Message-----
From: Raquel Guzzo <rguzzo@mpc.com.br>
Sender: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 20:30:45
To: <ablunden@mira.net>; eXtended Mind, Culture,
Activity<xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Reply-To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Subject: Re: [xmca] Polls are closed: Manfred Holodynsk's article is
choice


Raquel S. L. Guzzo
Pos-Graduação em Psicologia
Centro de Ciências da Vida
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas

rguzzo@puc-campinas.edu.br
rguzzo@pq.cnpq.br
rguzzo@mpc.com.br

On 30 Mar 2013, at 20:21, Andy Blunden wrote:


So what can be meant by "societal meaning" then, Helena? Material
objects (such as the bank building, and the various human bodies
involved, and books and ledgers, coins, etc.) are "societal" in the
sense of being universal. But "meaning" implies to me an act of
"interpretation" of material objects, something particular. And if the
Politburo is not there to ascribe the one societal meaning to material
things/processes/events, what on Earth can "societal meaning" be?

Andy

Helena Worthen wrote:

...

Before this gets too long, I'll just say that I agree, there is no
omniscient observer to tell us what the "societal meaning" of
something
is. In fact, if Manfred and I were standing in line at that bank where
this happened, it might be fun for us to compare our "personal sense"
of
what we saw.
Helena 
__________________________________________
_____
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/
Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden

__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca







--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden

__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca