Eric, here is what Vasily Davydov says in his book on "Generalisation":
The uniqueness of this sort of initial abstraction appears in the
names for it: “concrete abstraction”, “the concrete-universal
relationship is the objective cell of the whole that is under
investigation”, “content-oriented abstraction”, or simply “cell”.
These names express in different ways the essence of an initial
abstraction as a simple relationship of concreteness. It
incorporates the potential of the whole, and at the same time it is
again reproduced by this whole as its general basis. In our opinion,
while all of these names are legitimate, it is advisable to use the
term /content-oriented, real abstraction/. In contrast to formal
abstraction, it is historical (it is a genetic basis), and its
content exists /concretely/, in the form of a relationship that can
be contemplated rather than merely in the mind.
Andy
ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
Been considering this in depth recently and have an idea as "germ
cell" as an ideal of a conceptualiztion tool.
For instance in Yro's moon phase paper the unit of analysis is in
understanding knowledge acquisition as what the triangle of actiivy
expands upon.
Brazil's recent social upheavel would expand upon human subsistance
and basic needs.
The framework is in place for studying each of these activity systems
(perhaps systems isn't best word and another would provide better
clarity) with Yro's expanded triangle but because of the diversity of
human existence the "germ cell" proposition provides a good platform
for how to specify the utilization of the expanded triangle.
Thinking out loud
what do others think?
eric
------------------------------------------------------------------------
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca