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

To: lchcmike@gmail.com
From: Andy Blunden
Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
Date: 06/18/2013 12:17AM
Cc: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Subject: 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