RE: VS: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal

[Brett Bligh <Brett.Bligh@nottingham.ac.uk>]

I haven't read Adorno, so speculation is dangerous but...

Couldn't he be arguing that family is a germ-cell for *class society*?

I suspect that Andy's objection is based on seeing family as a set of interpersonal loyalties and associating that with, say, feudalism. So therefore we could say that because capitalism involves replacing these interpersonal loyalties with the commodity relation then family is a poor concept for understanding bourgeois society. It might have been useful for understanding feudal society, but this has "long ago passed into the dim past".

But what if we have a concept of class society more generally as a set of exploitative relations between classes of people, with slave-owning, feudalism, capitalism, etc., as successive instantiations? I'm sure in the dim past I've read people arguing that the family was where these exploitative relationships originated, around the time of the agricultural revolution. We have been reaping the unfolding consequences of this in different forms ever since. The wife was the first exploited labourer, and class society emerged as these exploitative relationships writ large.

I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the above interpretation, but it does appear to be a further candidate for an explanation in addition to the two that Andy suggested.

Brett Bligh



-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
Sent: 19 June 2013 16:26
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: VS: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal

Interesting, Rauno.
I would have thought that the family as the germ cell of "society"
either implies a "sociey" which has long, long ago passed into the dim past, or Adorno is using "society" in that peculiar meaning, as in "everyone who is anyone", "society" as that more or less exclusive group of the ultra wealthy elite. Otherwise, "society" is a bad concept. The "nation state," bourgeois society, even "community" have some meaning.
But "society" when it is spoken of nowadays, is usually a fiction, I think. Maybe the family is too???

Andy

Rauno Huttunen wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Theodor Adorno in his Minima Moralia speaks about germ cell of society meaning family:
>
> "Unpolitical attempts to break out of the bourgeois family usually only lead to deeper entanglement in such, and sometimes it seems as if the disastrous germ-cell of society, the family, is simultaneously the nourishing germ-cell of the uncompromising will for a different one. "
>
> Rauno Huttunen
> ________________________________________
> Lähettäjä: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] käyttäjän Peter Smagorinsky [smago@uga.edu] puolesta
> Lähetetty: 19. kesäkuuta 2013 13:38
> Vastaanottaja: eXtended Mind, Culture,  Activity
> Aihe: RE: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal
>
> Sounds good. Thx,p
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 6:35 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal
>
> "Germ" was a term used for it by both Hegel and Goethe, but they did not know about "cells". But when Marx introduced the term "cell form" for the same idea (teh cell as the basic unit of biology had been discovered before 1987 when Marx wrote that), the term "germ cell" became current among Marxists. In Hegel it is the abstract concept of a complex process, and called Urphaenomen by Goethe,. Although to make sense of that, you have to know that a "concept" is as real and tangible as any artefact or ideal (which is also material) and as Davydov helpfully emphasised, (in principle) an observable material thing, not just an idea or schema. It is not some hidden hypothetical something like a force or property of some kind or law or principle (though it doe actually incarnate a principle). But it is the logically primary instance of the complex process, for which it acts as an archetype. This is not quite the same as an "exemplar" (or sample) which may be typical, but not necessarily of all the complex process. A "germ cell" or "unit of analysis" is not only immediately and vicerally understandable, but embodies the principle which unifies the entire complex process, and constitutes its unity. A sample is a concrete thing, but its various attributes have not been abstracted from it. The "germ cell" does not have contingent or accidental attributes; all its attributes are essential.
>
> Does that (off the top of my head) Spiel help, Peter?
>
> Andy
>
> Peter Smagorinsky wrote:
>
>> So, how is a germ cell different from a sample?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>> On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 8:32 PM
>> To: ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
>> Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity
>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal
>>
>> Eric, attached is a contraband copy of Engestrom &Co.'s article for the Special Issue on Concept Formation - "Embodied Germ Cell at Work:
>> Building an Expansive Concept of Physical Mobility in Home Care." I have documented my theoretical differences with this article, but I have also endeavoured to put it into practice in my own one-patient rehabilitation facility here at home. This led me to further differences, but even I, who generally has scant regard for privacy, think it is all too private to share.
>>
>> This one you have to pay for, but here is the abstract:
>> http://tap.sagepub.com/content/21/5/598.abstract
>>
>> This is also the type of Engestrom approach which I appreciate. I don't again completely concur with the conclusions here, but I thnk it is a first class article!
>>
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Helena;
>>> Have not read him extensively enough but I do like his clinical
>>> approach to activity theory. Something that is tangible and can be
>>> conceptualized. Plan on reading him more. I found it interesting that
>>> he mentions "germ cell" only in passing and doesn't really expand
>>> much on it. I prefer his expanded triangle model of conceptualization
>>> and am not understandin why Andy is focused on the "germ cell"
>>> eric
>>>
>>> -----Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com> wrote: -----
>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>,
>>> <ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>, <ablunden@mira.net>
>>> From: Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com>
>>> Date: 06/18/2013 11:02AM
>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Engestrom's Finnish Proposal
>>>
>>> Eric et al:
>>>
>>> I like to read whatever Engestrom material shows up on xmca; he's a
>>> brilliant and stimulating thinker, but sometimes I have to laugh.
>>>
>>> The link Eric posted iactually goes to a proposal, as in "grant
>>> proposal," although I'm not sure who was going to fund it. Engestrom
>>> is proposing an ongoing research project that would take place at
>>> three sites, a healthcare provider, a bank, and a telecommunications
>>> outfit. He wants to study how his group, the Change Laboratory, works
>>> with these entities.
>>>
>>> My problem with his creative approach to research is that he acts as
>>> if the whole world has moved on to whatever he's studying next. He
>>> talks about "the historical development of work," "work..transformed
>>> from mass production and mass customization to co-configuration of
>>> customer-intelligent products and services with long life cycles",
>>> "post-bureaucratic work", 'work as "a living, growing network.never
>>> finished," etc etc. This may be true of "work" as it occurs in the
>>> Change Laboratory, but for the vast majority of human beings, work
>>> has not moved on, is not post-bureaucratic, and does NOT involve
>>> being set up in a permanent, "never finished" contract with a
>>> hospital, bank or phone company to reflect on one's own process. Kind
>>> of like being on a permanent research retainer!
>>>
>>> Somewhere along the line Engestrom has lost sight of fact that work
>>> is significantly related to earning a living, at least for most people.
>>> Maybe the concept is lost in translation. I suggest that he use a
>>> different word, however. "Creative exploration, " for example. But
>>> not "work"!!
>>>
>>> Helena Worthen
>>>
>>> From: <ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org <mailto:ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org>>
>>> Reply-To: "eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
>>> Date: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 7:52 AM
>>> To: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
>>> Cc: "eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
>>> Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?
>>>
>>> Here is an paper where Yro discusses the "germ cell".
>>> http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/people/engestro/files/The_Finnish
>>> _ proposal.pdf thought people might be interested, also rather short
>>> eric
>>>
>>> -----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> <mailto:-----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu> wrote: -----
>>> To: lchcmike@gmail.com <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com>
>>> From: Andy Blunden
>>> Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> <mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>> Date: 06/18/2013 12:17AM
>>> Cc: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> <mailto: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>
>>>
>>>
>>>> <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 <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 <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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_develop
>>>> ment.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-consciou
>>>> sness.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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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 <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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 <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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/> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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
>>>> <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/> <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 <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>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>> --
>>> *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
>>> __________________________________________ _____ 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *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
>
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
>

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


__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.




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