[Xmca-l] Re: Polysemy of "Community"

["Cliff O'Donnell" <cliffo@hawaii.edu>]

Yes, the embodiment is "not the precondition of man’s formation but  
its product."

Cliff

On Aug 14, 2013, at 6:59 PM, mike cole wrote:

> Colleagues-- Is there perhaps some relationship between the notions of
> "shared artifacts" and "shared meanings?" If Mandelshtam forgot the  
> word he
> wanted to say, and thought,
> unembodied, returned to the hall of shadows" what is the form of the
> embodiment if not in something human-created, a paricular,  
> historically
> sedimented, materialized configuration of the human voice that, dare  
> we
> consider it, ART-i-ficial?
>
> perhaps?
> mike
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>  
> wrote:
>
> > That's an alternative way to go, Cliff, define "community" by "shared
> > meanings," but the upshot of that way is the counter-intuitive  
> > conclusion
> > that kids and their parents belong to different "cultural  
> > communities."
> >
> > There is one point which I must clarify though from your last words  
> > below:
> > "The material form of an artifact may be universal in the sense  
> > that we may
> > all agree on the label for it. However, the artifact may have very
> > different meanings for us." No. The artefacts have a universal  
> > material
> > form despite us having "different labels" for it. The foundation of  
> > natural
> > science is that matter exist independently of human activity,  
> > obedient to
> > natural laws which are knowable. And natural science has a right to  
> > exist;
> > it is not a giant mistake. We *do* of course ascribe different  
> > meanings to
> > one and the same material form or object, but that is thanks to human
> > activity. The matter exists independently of our interpretation of  
> > it. This
> > is why I know I can rely on artefacts to provide a sound, universal
> > foundation for "community," and I leave it entirely open that a
> > multiplicity of meanings and actions are in conflict within the  
> > community.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >
> > Cliff O'Donnell wrote:
> >
> > > So I can see a problem with making "community" the subject matter,  
> > > or
> > > > "unit of analysis" for a study;
> > >
> > >    We agree. That is why activity settings are the units of  
> > > analysis we
> > > use.
> > >
> > > one would have to first select an artefact or combination of  
> > > artefacts,
> > > > (such as language and land) which serves to define the basis of  
> > > > the said
> > > > "community." The point then is that the "community" is *not*  
> > > > defined by
> > > > shared *meanings*;
> > >
> > >    So why define community by artifacts? Why not by shared meanings?
> > >
> > > in fact, different components of the "community" may attach
> > > > diametrically opposite meanings to a given artefact (word,  
> > > > symbol, tool,
> > > > ...) or even use it in ways which are quite incommensurable.
> > >
> > >    If community is defined by shared meanings, those with  
> > > "diametrically
> > > opposite meanings" would by definition belong to different cultural
> > > communities (even if they did live in the same geographical unit).
> > >
> > > But! the material form of the artefact is *universal* in what ever  
> > > way
> > > > it is used, meant or interpreted. The *materiality* of artefacts  
> > > > is the
> > > > foundation was what is *universal* in human life. Projects give  
> > > > us what is
> > > > *particular* in human life (ascribing different meanings to one  
> > > > and the
> > > > same artefact), and actions (not persons) give us what is  
> > > > *individual* in
> > > > human life, for the purposes of theoretical analysis.
> > >
> > >    The material form of an artifact may be universal in the sense  
> > > that
> > > we may all agree on the label for it. However, the artifact may  
> > > have very
> > > different meanings for us and these meanings may lead to quite  
> > > different
> > > actions and, as you point out, be the basis for conflict.
> > >
> > >    Cliff
> > --

Clifford R. O'Donnell, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
Past-President, Society for Community Research and Action (APA  
Division 27)

University of Hawai‘i
Department of Psychology
2530 Dole Street
Honolulu, HI 96822