These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,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These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,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.
This would be an excellent candidate for a book to be reviewed in MCA,
Larry. Are you volunteering?
mike
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Larry Purss <lpurss@shaw.ca> wrote:
> Avis and Mike and Martin [and others on the infant theme]
>
> What are the origins of infant engagement? I want to give some ideas from
> Vasudevi Reddy. She writes
> "A second-person approach [being addressed by a YOU] seems not only explain
> infant behavior better than either a first person {I position} or a third
> person "spectator" approach. It also changes the lens through which we
> PERCEIVE the problem of other minds that is expressed in much of the
> developmental literature. [that is, as a spectatorial process of observation
> of mere behavior across a gap] The important difference between a 2nd
> person approach and a 1st person approach is that the emphasis here is NOT
> on recognition of the SIMILARITY to self of other peoples acts, but,
> crucially, of the EXPERIENCE of a RECIPROCAL RESPONSE to the others acts.
> The gap between minds becomes hard to find in this re-embodiment and this
> re-embedding.
> Infants are capable of entering into dialogue [recognition and response]
> with other people remarkably early in life. {I would add this dialogical
> process EXPERIENCED recognition and response continues to INFORM
> communication throughout the lifespan}.
>
> Reddy points out many philosophers take this 2nd person perspective [or
> lens]: W. James called it "being noticed", Bahktin, the recognition of an
> "answering consciousness", Hegel, the awareness of recognition, and Buber,
> the experience of the I-thou relation.
>
> This 2nd person concept refers to more than just "interpersonal
> attraction", more than just a recognition of a SIMILARITY of another person
> to the self, and more than just an INFERENCE from observation of movements.
> THE YOU is radically implicated in a 2nd person stance.
>
> Larry
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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