Re: [xmca] Francois Cooren

[Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>]

Greg,

I wonder if Latour's awareness that the individual seems to be increasingly
*closed* IS the *alien* that MSOC and Cooren are referring to.  Is it  THIS
alienation [that Latour and MSOC are describing] which may be the catalyst
to  put the self  and particular world views [horizons] *in question*.

Greg, what is the intent of Latour and Cooren in engaging us in their
conversation on the *agency* of objects [artifacts].  If we broaden
Gadamer's notion of texts to include Latour and Cooren's more general
notion of artifacts [as having agency because they do things to us] then
there may be the possibility of *fusing* Latour and Gadamer.

I wonder if Gadamer's *way* [in the Taoist notion of way]  which is NOT
theoretical or methodological, but rather puts in question *how* we arrive
at any form of *understanding*  may participate in expanding our horizons
in exploring the meaning of *objective agency*.

If Latour's horizon is *valid* then where do we go next.  In the process of
*unveiling* the constituting force of artifacts and texts, does this
*understanding* put in question our received views of subjectivity,
otherness, and alterity.  In other words, in the micro analysis of
interaction sequences that includes objects as agentic [doing things], is
it possible to *develop* a dis-position [or way] of RESPONDING that
actively and purposely embraces uncertainty [putting ourselves in question]
that leaves an openning for *fusing* of horizons that *see through* or
*unveil* THIS effective moment in history?

Larry

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>wrote:

> Thanks Ivan and Larry, very helpful for fleshing out this new terrain (a
> lovely mixed metaphor speaking me, no?).
>
> Larry, I wonder if there isn't some conflict or difference between
> Gadamer's notion of "opening" or putting into question and what seems to be
> coming from the MSOC (and Latour and others) and in which the individual
> seems to be increasingly closed (I suspect that 'determined' might be too
> strong of langage, but not sure). But maybe I'm misreading your sense of
> "openng"?
>
> Ivan, love the shoe with toes example (I would add that there is a semiotic
> strangeness of sitting with a person whose individual toes are visible -
> not that it bothers me, but I do wonder if this would "offend" in polite
> company?). And I would add that, as I understand it, the lack of heavy
> padding on your shoes also makes your whole body accomodate to the shoe so
> that you tend to strike the ground more with the ball of your foot rather
> than your heel. And as I understand it, this is much better for posture and
> for general joint health (heel striking is much more jolting on the body),
> and it also helps with things like balance and stability because the
> muscles around your toes are brought into functioning again (as opposed to
> in a regular tennis shoe where they are rendered useless because they can't
> grasp or grab anything...). So our shoes "speak" us (as well as "speak of"
> us!).
>
> -greg
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Ivan Rosero <irosero@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
> > I know the MSOC relies heavily on a Latourian understanding of non-human
> > actors.  When an artist says that the medium in which she works is alive
> > and speaks to her, most of us have no trouble granting the *artist* this
> > use of language.  Artists are quirky like that.  But the compelling idea
> > I'm hearing here from MSOC, and Latour, and Vygotsky, is that for
> mediation
> > to be an effectual process in interaction it *must* be that we are all
> > artists in tuning into and hearing the voices of non-human actants.
> >
> > I've recently been using five-toed shoes with very thin soles, through
> > which I can feel the ground much more delicately than before.  So now I
> > tend to walk off the beaten path and off the sidewalk, because it's very
> > nice to feel the textured ground below my feet.  The problem is that this
> > is creating tension with my friends when we go on walks together --I see
> > them look a bit perplexed and get a bit annoyed when I start crossing a
> > patch of woods instead of staying on the straight and narrow of the
> > sidewalk.  Wrapped in thick shoes, they slip and slide, loose their
> footing
> > and find it hard to save face --so they get mad at me.
> >
> > But it's not my fault, since the ground speaks differently to me now.
> >
> > Ivan
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Greg, the "how so" that considers micro-interaction may have an
> > > *as-structure" or ventriloquation of language as metaphoricity.
> > >
> > > In the foreword to the book, [pageXV] the author states,
> > >
> > > Attention shifts from speech to *figures* of speech. Then an even
> > stranger
> > > thing happens: The very notion of figures of speech reverses itself and
> > > becomes *literal*: we are being acted upon by these invisible entities
> > that
> > > *haunt* us and populate (or even crowd) the interaction.  At this
> point,
> > > ventriloquism is inverted: we, the human subjects are the *dummies*
> > toward
> > > which other entities are projecting their real voices AS IF they were
> > > coming from us. All the studies of metaphor, of story telling, or
> staging
> > > arguments are put upside down. We are spoken or silenced by others, by
> > > *aliens* toward which we should direct our attention IF we want to
> > > UNDERSTAND what makes us act or speak"
> > >
> > > Greg, this description of the sequence FROM  figures of speech TO the
> > > literal as a movement or process  *AS IF* the voices [or texts] were
> > coming
> > > from us, points to Gadamer's notion: *fusion* of horizons.  Language
> *as*
> > > fusion [language as metaphoricity or as-structure].
> > > THIS process BECOMES literal as a dialogical relational process.
> > > When we are spoken or silenced by *aliens* or alterity we are put into
> > > question and OPENED. How we are opened by the invisible entities that
> > haunt
> > > us and populate our interactions becomes a matter of interpretation
> which
> > > may lead to genuine understanding.
> > >
> > > Larry
> > > On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Greg Thompson <
> > greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > don't know about ventriloquation/dual stimulation (sounds promising).
> > > > Rather I'm seeing connections to a processual/relational ontology in
> > > which
> > > > the medium (communication) constitutes the so-called "things" of the
> > > world.
> > > > (cf. Korzybski, Abbott, and Packer), with an answer to "how so" that
> > > > considers micro-interaction. Very appealing (to me).
> > > > -greg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 9:35 PM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I wonder if ventriloquation is related in any way to the notion of
> > dual
> > > > > stimulation?
> > > > >
> > > > > mike
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Greg, here is a further description of the book. It seems to be
> the
> > > > book
> > > > > > is putting into question a similar theme to Gadamer who suggests
> > > > > effective
> > > > > > history has its own agency [living text] and the *fusion* of
> > > > > understandings
> > > > > > modify [expand] BOTH horizons.  The text has its own agency.
> > > > > > Not sure if Gadamer is included in this book but the theme seems
> > > > > > fascinating [and a way to understand organizations]
> > > > > > The cost of the book is prohibitive but the theme is fascinating.
> > > > > > Larry
> > > > > >
> > > > > > FROM THE PUBLISHER
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What happens when people communicate or dialogue with each other?
> > > This
> > > > is
> > > > > > the daunting question that this book proposes to address by
> > starting
> > > > > from a
> > > > > > controversial hypothesis: What if human interactants were not the
> > > only
> > > > > ones
> > > > > > to be considered, paraphrasing Austin (1962), as 'doing things
> with
> > > > > words'?
> > > > > > That is, what if other 'things' could also be granted the status
> of
> > > > > agents
> > > > > > in a dialogical situation? "Action and Agency in Dialogue:
> Passion,
> > > > > > Incarnation, and Ventriloquism" proposes to explore this unique
> > > > > hypothesis
> > > > > > by mobilizing metaphorically the notion of ventriloquism.
> According
> > > to
> > > > > this
> > > > > > ventriloqual perspective, interactions are never purely local,
> but
> > > > > > dislocal, that is, they constantly mobilize figures (collectives,
> > > > > > principles, values, emotions, etc.) that incarnate themselves in
> > > > people's
> > > > > > discussions. This highly original book, which develops the
> > > analytical,
> > > > > > practical and ethical dimensions of such a theoretical
> positioning,
> > > may
> > > > > be
> > > > > > of interest to communication scholars, linguists, sociologists,
> > > > > > conversation analysts, management and organizational scholars, as
> > > well
> > > > as
> > > > > > philosophers interested in language, action and ethics.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Greg Thompson <
> > > > greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > > > > > >wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anyone out there know much about Francois Cooren or the
> Montreal
> > > > School
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > Organizational Communication?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As for the former, Cooren's book Action and Agency in Dialogue
> > > asks:
> > > > > > > "What if human interactants were not the only ones to be
> > > considered,
> > > > > > > paraphrasing Austin (1962), as “doing things with words”? That
> > is,
> > > > what
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > > other “things” could also be granted the status of agents in a
> > > > > dialogical
> > > > > > > situation?"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As for the latter, the MSOC is characterized by wikipedia as:
> > > > > > > "taking communication as the "site and surface" of
> organizations,
> > > > > meaning
> > > > > > > that the latter emerge from and are maintained by communication
> > > > > > processes."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Both of these seem to be very important points that, I thought,
> > > > > > articulate
> > > > > > > well with recent XMCA conversations.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anyone have any insight?
> > > > > > > Perhaps a recommendation?
> > > > > > > -greg
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > > > > > > Sanford I. Berman Post-Doctoral Scholar
> > > > > > > Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition
> > > > > > > Department of Communication
> > > > > > > University of California, San Diego
> > > > > > > http://ucsd.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> > > > > > > __________________________________________
> > > > > > > _____
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > > > Sanford I. Berman Post-Doctoral Scholar
> > > > Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition
> > > > Department of Communication
> > > > University of California, San Diego
> > > > http://ucsd.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> > > > __________________________________________
> > > > _____
> > > > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> Sanford I. Berman Post-Doctoral Scholar
> Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition
> Department of Communication
> University of California, San Diego
> http://ucsd.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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