These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes, and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.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These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes, and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.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.
On 31 May 2011 13:09, christine schweighart <schweighartgate@hotmail.com>wrote: Hi Christine, My comments are below. > I’d like to clarify my thoughts on how there can be separation of higher > psychological function from a biological perspective. Recalling David > Kellogg’ > meaning and sense of his apple example, sensuous experiencing of an apple > unfolds in relation to another sensual source –whatever is experienced on > the bringing > forth of meaning in coordinating action with the word apple. Immanence of > these > senses in flux in inner form seems fluid, but also physiological. > Yes, or material. > [...] > > How does this relate to inner form and word meaning? > Well it might be useful as metaphor of a fluid model – one of structural > drift. > Drift doesn’t carry the weight of pathway or > path dependence (as how the set of decisions faced for any > given circumstance is limited by the decisions made in the past, even > though > past circumstances may no longer be relevant). > This seems particularly relevant going back to Jay Lemke’s call for the > particular and what is taken forward to the next particular case. > Sounds v. much like where I'm coming from. I'm not sure I'd call it fluid though. I believe there is a definite pattern which the term 'fluid' seems to elude. [...] The review was written by István Hargittai, Leonardo, Volume 41, Number 2, > April 2008, > pp. 185-187 (Review) > > Who took issue with the meaning of > dissymmetry used by Darvas , following a Shubinov use quoted below ( > although > in doing this the overall contribution of work put forward in Darvas’ book > might not be fairly evaluated, I > don’t know): [...] > In Curie’s > original words: “Dissymmetry creates the phenomenon” (“C’est la dissymétrie > qui crée le phénomène”) [2]. > > Possibly in tune with the notion of rhythm as "the conflict between meter and words", Psychology of Art, page 219. That > is, a phenomenon exists and is observable due to dissymmetry, due to the > absence of some symmetry elements from the system." > > Darvas, on p14 if you have access to the e-book ,made observations about > how in natural formations in plants and animals there isn't a perfect > symmetry, that quality of asymmetry contributed to a sense of harmony and > beauty. This seems to have something to contribute to the discussion of > individual difference, and rather than it following a pathway ( dependence) > to insecurity,to value and receive difference as a developmental source. It > would have many more forms than in verbal thought alone and is embodied > difference including all forms of expression and visual > re-presentationssensation, it seems to me. I even wonder how aesthetics does > interplay in physiological function in a non-metaphoric way., which is why I > struggle to see a complete separation of biological and sociohistorical. > The notion of contradiction that Vygotsky uses in the Psychology of Art may be appropriate. Personally, I see plenty of alignment with godel-derived representations, which is a healthy sign. Huw __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca