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

Re: Fw: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?



Yes, in Yjro's (1986) words, it is a "root model". (The derivation of it is a beautiful piece of work, too, close to Hegel's early "System of Ethical Life". Deserves to remain in print).

But modelling a complex process is not the same as the method of Goethe, Hegel, Marx and Vygotsky. As you know, Mike, in order to understand this approach, which Luria called Romantic Science, I had to go back to its origins c. 1787 when Goethe was doing his Journey in Italy, studying all the plant life, and its variation by altitude, latittude, nearness to the sea, etc., and in conversation with J G Herder, arrived a his conception of Urphaenomen. The Urphaenomen is not a model.

It is an abstraction, true. And yes, the understanding of a complex process by the "romantic" method is indeed, the rising to the concrete, the logical-historical reconstruction of the whole process from this abstract germ.

As I remarked (somewhere) I find Yrjo's work over the past couple of years, which focuses more on the germ cell than the triangle, closer to what I am trying to do. The germ cell is not a model either.

What is at odds here is whether a real, complex situation (such as reforming the education system in a nation in Africa, rather than in the USSR or Finland) can be based on a conception which isolates a "system of activity", whilst dozens of different ethnic groups, NGOs, government(s), trade unions and so on, are all contesting the aims and benefits of "education." Every person in such a situation is committed to more than one project, and deploys concepts (institutionalised projects) frequently at odds with one another. What is needed is a process whose basic units are (1) units and not systems, and (2) processes of development, processes in which people are struggling to realise ideas, processes of formation. And we need the algebra through which such units interact with one another, rather than declaring any single such interaction to be an entire new "unit" - i.e. coupled systems.

Andy
mike cole wrote:
Isn't the trangle a "model, " Andy? A model of the root metaphor. Still an abstraction... waiting to see if it can rise to the concrete? Perhaps?

Empirically speaking, what is at odds here? For whom?

mike

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:

    Antti, I was directing my question to you and your remarks.

    In Engestrom's highlky regarded, now out of print, 1987 text
    "Learning by Expanding", the famous triangle logo is given as
    Figure 2.6, and after a long consideration of "candidates" for
    "unit of analysis" he says the following about this triangle: "The
    model of Figure 2.6 may now be compared with the four criteria of
    a root model of human activity, set forth earlier in this
    chapter." and goes on to list and consider the criteria which are
    commonly associated in this current with the notion of "unit of
    analysis." (numerous citations are not required). But he never
    said that the triangle is a unit of analaysis, and it is not, and
    cannot be. He said it is a root model and it is. The root model is
    a system concept, not a unit of analysis.

    Do you think it possible that this has been the source of some
    confusion?

    Andy

    Antti Rajala wrote:


        Thanks Andy for sharing the wikipedia text, and your thoughts
        about the issue! The thoughts about unit of analysis were my
        own interpretation of the study, and I am not sure if the
        issue you raised concerns the original study.

        Warm wishes, Antti



        On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Andy Blunden
        <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
        <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>> wrote:

            Antti, here is a link to th eWikipedia on "System concept"
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System
            Why do Activity Theorists in Engstrom's current of
        thinking mix up
            the idea of a system concept with a unit of analysis?

            Andy


            Antti Rajala wrote:

                Greg,

                You asked:
                ”My question is getting at where we locate "agency". In
                individuals alone?
                Or as possibly being distributed among multiple people and
                perhaps in
                amanner that isn't recognizable to the individual. But
        maybe
                there is
                aconcept for that that is different from "double
        stimulation.”

                I think that double stimulation can be analyzed not
        only at
                the individual
                level but at the collective level as well. Actually,
        the study
                of Engeström
                and Sannino (2013) that I referred to in my earlier email
                gives a nice
                example. The study also involves in some respects a
        similar
                situation as
                the one that you described having taken place with the
        workers
                in Malaysia.

                According to my reading, the study describes a change
        laboratory
                intervention taking place in a university library. The
        library
                as invited
                researchers to help them find new forms of work with
        research
                groups. A
                first stimulus emerges in the course of the change
        laboratory
                intervention,
                as a member of one of the research groups that the
        university
                library is
                delivering services says that they can find these
        services in
                the internet
                without the help of the library. Thus a problem
        emerges for
                the librarians
                to collectively produce a service that would be genuinely
                helpful for the
                research groups.

                In solving this problem, they organize their
        collective action
                with the
                help of a second stimulus, namely the concept of
        knotworking
                (Engeström,
                Engeström & Vähäaho, 1999) that the researchers have
                introduced in the
                beginning of the change laboratory. In particular, a new
                working group, a
                knot, is formed that starts to work with the emergent
        problem
                of inventing
                a useful service.

                What is in my opinion very innovative, Engeström and
        Sannino
                also provide
                an example of this second stimulus, the concept of
                knotworking, becoming an
                initial theoretical generalization that is reworked and
                enriched through a
                process of ascending from abstract to concrete as the
                intervention evolves.
                Specifically, in the end of the intervention, the
        concept of
                knotworking
                gives rise to many concrete, practical applications of the
                librarians' work
                at multiple levels of hierarchy.

                As for the unit of analysis, I think that the unit of
        analysis
                in the study
                is the intersection of several activity systems, the
                university libarary
                and the research groups, In terms of agency, one can maybe
                talk about
                shared transformative agency in which the subject is
        not an
                individual but
                a collective. (More about shared transformative
        agency, see
                Virkkunen’s
                paper in
        http://www.activites.org/v3n1/v3n1.book.pdf#page=43)

                Best wishes, Antti


                On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 6:57 PM, <ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
        <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>
                <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
        <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>>> wrote:

forgot to send this to XMCA

                    -----Forwarded by ERIC RAMBERG/spps on 06/06/2013
        10:56AM
                    -----
                    To: ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
        <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
                    From: ERIC RAMBERG/spps
                    Date: 06/06/2013 09:05AM

                    Subject: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?

                    True true, the history of philosophy does lead
        there Andy.
                     But that leads
                    to my trepidations regarding ideology lacking in
        practice.

                    What substance within conscious formation is
        measurable?

                    I believe that answer has yet to be found
                    perhaps?

                    eric

                    -----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
                    <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>> wrote: -----
                     To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
                    <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
                    From: Andy Blunden
                    Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
                    <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>>
                    Date: 06/05/2013 08:42PM
                    Subject: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?

                    Eric,
                    By posiing the problem as that of the Kantian
        dilemma, of
                    unifying two
                    disparate abstractions, you determine the answer
        as from
                    the history of
                    philosophy and the answer is Hegel's answer: "a
        formation of
                    consciousness" or Gestalt des Bewusstsein.

                    Andy

                    ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
        <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org> <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
        <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>> wrote:
I believe that this discussion needs to
        involve "unit
                        of analysis" for
                        what it is that provides the mediational method.
                        What unit of study can properly encapsulate
        that which
                        is being observed?
                        Activity? Concept? Word? Mirror Neuron?
                        Oh my what a great temptest LSV did let out of
        the teapot
                        eric

                        -----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
                        <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>> wrote: -----
                        To: "xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>"
                        <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>>
                        From: Achilles Delari Junior
                        Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
                        <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>>
                        Date: 06/05/2013 07:04AM
                        Subject: RE: [xmca] Double Stimulation?

                        Sure, Greg,
                        Well, seems to me that "draw analogies between
                        different domains of
                        their worlds" is closer to "meaning
        construction" than
                        to choice a
                        "stimulus medium" to help memory tasks, for
        instance.
                        The "double
                        stimulation" is fine because introduces a kind of
                        mediation between a
                        stimulus and our response to the stimulus. But,
                        following Vygotsky's
                        formulations at that time this new series of
                        "stimulus" (a nude, a
                        word, etc) act also as a stimulus, a
        conditioned one.
                        If you change
                        you paradigm to the proposition that all sign
        implies
                        any kind of
                        "generalization process" (meaning) that differs in
                        their structure and
                        has a genetic construction (see the studies about
                        concepts, for
                        instance), a sign could not be only a second
        series of
                        stimuli ruled
                        by the same laws that a conditional reflex...
        As in
                        "Instrumental
                        method": S-------X-------R. Where the relation
                        S---------R is a direct
                        stimulus response relationship, but when you
        introduce
                        a second series
                        of stimulus "X" (double stimulation) you have an
                        indirect stimulus
                        response relationship, but the relation
        between S and
                        X, and X and R
                        remain a conditioned reflex relationship... "Draw
                        analogies between
                        different domains of our worlds" seem to mean
        that we
                        are in transit
                        between different words of signification, and
        culture
                        is a human
                        production that involves the "generalization"
        from a
                        world to another,
                        broader, maybe not exactly more precise, but
                        "broader", in my opinion.
                        I don't know...


                        "In natural memory a direct associative
        (conditional
                        reflex)
                        connection A?B is established between two
        stimuli A
                        and B. In
                        artificial, mnemotechnic memory of the same
                        impression, by means of a
                        psychological tool X (a knot in a handkerchief, a
                        mnemonic scheme)
                        instead of the direct connection A?B two new
        ones are
                        established: A?X
                        and X?B Just like the connection A?B each of
        them is a
                        natural
                        conditional reflex process, determined, by the
                        properties of the brain
                        tissue. What is new, artificial, and
        instrumental is
                        the fact of the
                        replacement of one connection A?B by two
        connections:
                        A?X and X?B They
                        lead to the same result, but by a different
        path. What
                        is new is the
                        artificial direction which the instrument
        gives to the
                        natural process
                        of establishing a conditional connection,
        i.e., the
                        active utilization
                        of the natural properties of brain tissue."
        Vygotsky
                        "The Instumental
                        Method" (this is 1930)
http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1930/instrumental.htm

                        But already in 1928:

                        "Let us now compare the natural and cultural
        mnemonics
                        of a child. The
                        relation between the two forms can be graphically
                        expressed by means
                        of a triangle: in case of natural memorization a
                        direct associative or
                        conditional reflexive connection is set up
        between two
                        points, A and
                        B. In case of mnemotechnical memorization,
        utilizing
                        some sign,
                        instead of one associative connection AB, the
        others
                        are set up AX and
                        BX, which bring us to the same result, but in a
                        roundabout way. Each
                        of these connections AX and BX is the same kind of
                        conditional-reflexive process of connection as
        AB."
                        Vygotsky (1928)

http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1929/cultural_development.htm See: "AX and BX is the same kind of
                        conditional-reflexive process of
                        connection as AB." --> The same kind... This
        paradigm
                        will not be the
                        same in 1933-34...

                        "(Introduction: the importance of the sign;
        its social
                        meaning). In
                        older works we ignored that the sign has
        meaning. <
                        But there is “a
                        time to cast away stones, and a time to gather
        stones
                        together”
                        (Ecclesiastes). > We proceeded from the
        principle of
                        the constancy of
                        meaning, we discounted meaning. But the problem of
                        meaning was already
                        present in the older investigations. Whereas
        before
                        our task was to
                        demonstrate what “the knot” and logical memory
        have in
                        common, now our
                        task is to demonstrate the difference that exists
                        between them.From
                        our works it follows that the sign changes the
                        interfunctional
                        relationships." (Vygotsky, 1933-34)

http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1934/problem-consciousness.htm And now?


                        Thank you.

                        Achilles.

Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 18:31:23 -0600
                            Subject: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?
                            From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
        <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
                            <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
        <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>>
                            To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>

                            Achilles,

                            Sounded interesting, but I'm not sure I
        followed
                            you completely. You
say that Strathern's quote seems like it has a
        broader
                            application that
"double stimulation", but I could use some help
        with the
                            rest of your message.

                            If you have a few minutes, maybe you could try
                            rephrasing?

                            -greg


                            On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Achilles
        Delari
                            Junior <
                            achilles_delari@hotmail.com
        <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com>
                            <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com
        <mailto:achilles_delari@hotmail.com>>> wrote:

In my undertanding, this is very
        broader and
                                more powerful than
double stimulation... Double stimulation could be
                                overcoming with another
way for think signs than "medium stimulus" -
        See "The
                                problem of
consciousness" (1933-34), for instance. The more
        important
                                will be not the
similarity between a nude and a word, but their
                                difference, "before was
forgotten that sign had a meaning" and "now" the
        meaning must
                                be take in account.
Double stimulation, in my understanding, do not
                                resists to this new point
of view. Achilles.

Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 06:19:04 -0600
                                    From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
        <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
                                    <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
        <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>>
                                    To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
                                    <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>;
                                    lchcmike@gmail.com
        <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com>
                                    <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com
        <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com>>;
antti.rajala@helsinki.fi
        <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi>
        <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi
        <mailto:antti.rajala@helsinki.fi>>
CC:
                                    Subject: [xmca] Double Stimulation?

                                    I wonder if this quote by Marilyn
                                    Strathern can be productively
connected (not necessarily geneaologically, but
                                    ideologically) to the
notion of "double stimulation" (which I am
        just now
                                    trying to figure out):
                                    "Culture consists in the way
        people draw
                                    analogies between
different domains of their worlds" (1992: 47).

                                    -greg

                                    --
                                    Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
                                    Visiting Assistant Professor
                                    Department of Anthropology
                                    883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
                                    Brigham Young University
                                    Provo, UT 84602
http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson __________________________________________
                                    _____
                                    xmca mailing list
                                    xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
                                    <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca __________________________________________
                                _____
                                xmca mailing list
                                xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
                                http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

                            --
                            Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
                            Visiting Assistant Professor
                            Department of Anthropology
                            883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
                            Brigham Young University
                            Provo, UT 84602
                            http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
                            __________________________________________
                            _____
                            xmca mailing list
                            xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
                            http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
__________________________________________
                        _____
                        xmca mailing list
                        xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
                        http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        __________________________________________
                        _____
                        xmca mailing list
                        xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
        <mailto: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/>
                    Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
                    http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden

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

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


__________________________________________
                _____
                xmca mailing list
                xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto: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/>
            Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
            http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden

            __________________________________________
            _____
            xmca mailing list
            xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
        <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto: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/>
    Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
    http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden

    __________________________________________
    _____
    xmca mailing list
    xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto: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