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

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



To the extent that we have a consultant who is invited to resolve problems in an institution of some kind, if the impact on that the life of that institution can be validly abstracted from the other projects at work, such as governments, political or ethnic groups with grievances, patients who are campaigning to have a say in their health care, governments imposing cost-cutting and computer work-control systems intended to take the teachers out of education, and the nurses out of health care, etc. ... In other words, to the extent that the idea of a "system of actions" or "system of activity" with a neat boundary accurately reflects the social situation at issue, then I am sure the method of the triangle works fine.

But what about the Egyptian Revolution, when workers (white collar public servants and highly exploited factory workers) and student-intellectuals all enter into a struggle against the US-backed torture-regime of Hosni Mubarak (with a mass of ruraal poor in the background), ... without knowing what they are wanting to achieve, not necessarily trusting the other parties,...? What about when gay men suddenly find themselves not only the target of an unknown deadly disease, but being blamed for spreading it to others, and the medical scientists want to use them as guinea pigs, they are threatened with bring forced to wear the equivalent of a Star of David, ... and yet they manage to not only defeat the disease but come out if it having won a huge victory agains homophobia and much improved social status. Wht about when the asbestos industry is marketing a miracle fibre which is still, a decade after it was eventually banned, killing 1000s in a horrible slow death, and the trade unions representing the workers are hand in glove with their employers, government regulators are being paid off and medical scientists (like the ones who told us tobacco is good for your health) are spreadig disinformation, ... and yet we got asbestos banned. Need I go on?

I don't believe the "system of activity" approach can even get a handle on those situations. As you know I am in the process of editing a volume of studies using (to one extent or another) the "project" approach, to understand these processes, for the purpose of doing things like this. It includes idenfiying contradictions in the workings of institutions (such as medical science, health care, industrial diseases regulation, and so on) but it also deals with complex processes of social change, where the participants themselves are only just discovering what it is they are fighting for, and multiple projects are in play.

These are the kind of issues I am interested in, so that is why I am interested in a theory which can deal with such issues,

Andy

mike cole wrote:
I fear this does not help me a whole lot, Andy.
Sorry I cannot grasp the method of Goethe properly. I guess Luria probably failed as well. Or maybe he succeeded and I have misunderstood him? Entirely possible.

I did not ask what what is at odds. I asked for what the empirical consequences of the the distinctions you are making are. I cannot follow the path to reforming all of the educational system of the USSR or Russia, which, so far as I know, neither Vygotsky nor anyone else associated with Activity Theory every accomplished. Nore have I ever seen claims that they have. (The Finns appear to have done well recently using an approach, the relationship to activity theory I have no knowledge of, but perhaps our Finnish colleagues do).

Here is what would help me, and I suspect others on XMCA. Take an already published piece of work that uses the expanded triangle Yrjo proposes in Learning by Expanding. Say, the work on cleaners in the early work. Tell us about the mistaken conclusions that arise because of misunderstandings that confusion of the triangle for "activity" (no modifiers) causes. Suggest how we might improve our understanding. Or tell us why that example works, but some other example (teachers in schools, nurses and doctors in a hospital, etc.) does not.

Or suggest an entirely different way of looking at matters so that when we go into classrooms, housing projects, work places, we can more effectively understand what is going on and be of more help to those with whom we work that publishing another article in MCA.

I guess I am asking that you rise to the concrete here, keeping the object of analysis constant.

My apologies if this seems unreasonable. Perhaps it is approaching senility, but
I am failing to track you.

mike


Lost in the words here.
mike

On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:

    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>
        <mailto: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>>
                <mailto: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>>
                        <mailto: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>>
                <mailto: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>>
                            <mailto: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>>
                <mailto: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>>
                            <mailto: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>> <mailto: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>>
                                <mailto: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>> <mailto: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>> <mailto: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>>
                                <mailto: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>>
                                    <mailto: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>> <mailto: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>>
<mailto: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>>
<mailto: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>>
<mailto: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>>
                                            <mailto: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>>
                <mailto: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>>
<mailto: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>> <mailto: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>> <mailto: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>> <mailto: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>> <mailto: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/>
                            <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>>
                <mailto: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>>
                <mailto: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>>
                <mailto: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/>
        <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>>
                <mailto: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



--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*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