Engestrom – Interobjectivity, Ideality, and Dialectics
Engestrom, Yrjo. “Interobjectivity, Ideality, and Dialectics.” Culture, Mind, and Activity. 3 4 (1996). 259-266. Print. E. begins by highlighting how Latour’s theory of interobjectivity is analogous to many tenants of CHAT. First, E. notes that Latour’s theory of object-directed action shares much with Leont’ev’s description of activity: “The expression of ‘objectless activity’ is devoid of any meaning’” (259). Goal... Read More
Latour – On Interobjectivity
Latour, Bruno. “On Interobjectivity.” Mind, Culture, and Activity 3 4 (1996). 228-245. Print. Latour echoes the questions that come to the fore at the beginning of Reassembling the Social early on this piece: namely, how do we understand society? Is it determined by a superstructure or does it only occur through interactions between two participants? Is there a middle ground? When we observe interaction are we merely observing the... Read More
Gries – Practicing Methods in Ancient Cultural Rhetorics: Uncovering Rhetorical Action in Moche Burial Rituals
Laurie Gries – “Practicing Methods in Ancient Cultural Rhetorics: Uncovering Rhetorical Action in Moche Burial Rituals” in Rhetorics of the Americas 3114 BCE to 2012 CE G. claims that studying cultures on their own terms is the future of ancient non-Western rhetorical historiography. In this piece she will demonstrate what that looks like. The use of symbols inscribed on material artifiacts will be the main means of meeting Pre-Columbian... Read More
Schiappa – Some of my best friends are Neosophists: A Response to Consigny
Schiappa – “Some of my best friends are Neosophists: A Response to Scott Consigny” In the introduction to this piece S. claims that Consigny misread him: 1) He is an antifoundtionalist; 2) he doesn’t “oppose” neosophistic scholarship; 3) he thinks Consigny’s reading of antifoundationalism is problematic and wants to offer a more “pragmatic” version that would be more politically efficacious (272). Schiappa rehashes a lot of what... Read More
Poulakos – Interpreting Sophistical Rhetoric: A Response to Schiappa
Poulakos – “Interpreting Sophistical Rhetoric: A Response to Schiappa” Poulakos comes out guns a’blazin in this response to Schiappa’s critique. He notes that in the response he will argue that 1) Schiappa has no case; 2) even if he did have a case, it could not be supported, and 3) even if it could be supported, it would be useless. WOW. P begins his invective by taking S. to task for relying exclusively on philological evidence to... Read More
