These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
Its often not clear to me, either, tony. "Influence" (to site a related discussion) may appear to be linear but i think that idea hides the underlying dynamic processes. Jay's comments are relevant here. So is Dewey's critique of the reflex concept. You have an active, living organism, "doing something." a "stimulus" smacks her/him in the mouth/eye/skin. That "SEEMS" to be the influence that gets the eye to blink or the mouth to water or......, but what "the" stimulus" is depends a whole lot on what the person is doing. "The" stimulus is not entirely specifiable beyond the ongoing action/activity of individual Andy refers to. These issues touch on one that I think about often: ""I forgot the word I wanted to say, and thought, unembodied, returns,to the hall of shadows."--e.g. the thought is completed in the word. ----- I keep thinking that the word/reduced-thought enters the world and is or isnot taken up, and either way, the "meaning" keeps changes and when it "comes back" to you, and you think about "it" , "it" is no longer the same thing. "The tought" is notne's own, control has changed. family calls. mike On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Tony Whitson <twhitson@udel.edu> wrote: > On Fri, 21 Aug 2009, Andy Blunden wrote: > > Mike Cole wrote: >> >>> Andy-- >>> Don't speeches and texts "pass control to and from an individual"?? >>> >> >> Yes, it's obvious when you're talking about discourse, but >> what about the more general domain of social action? I am >> thinking that the idea applies in just the same way, even if >> not quite so clearly. So "action" begins and ends when you >> get/lose control of the action from/to another person. >> >> On consciousness, let me think now ... >> Andy >> > > "control" seems not so clear to me. What about the dialogic character of my > own <sic> train of thought? What about when a novelist or screenwriter pens > a line of dialogue for a character, but the fictitious character herself > fights back and, ultimately, refuses to say that line? Who's in control? > > _______________________________________________ > 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