Constructs and constructions

(no name) ( (no email) )
Mon, 18 Mar 1996 06:55:47 -0500 (EST)

Lois:

Would it be helpful to draw a definitive distinction between CONSTRUCTS
and CONSTRUCTIONS?

Is it useful to persist in thinking of CONSTRUCTS as two-poled judgment
scales. The utility of this CONSTRUCTION of CONSTRUCTS, I believe, has been
demonstrated over and over. One can find many, many references which elaborate
the idea that humans -- and perhaps other creatures -- develop and use two
poled judgment scales to order the flow of inputs. Note that I try to say that
the utility of this this CONSTRUCTION of CONSTRUCTS "has been demonstrated."
The CONSTRUCTION "two-poled judgment scales" has been, like all social
construction, invented and used by a wide variety of investigators and
scholars.
Is this CONSTRUCTION of CONSTRUCTS one which we can consider to be
useful.

Then, can we proceed to offer a CONSTRUCTION of CONSTRUCTION?
Should we say that when we use the sign CONSTRUCTION, we reference a
proactive cognitive process involving the assembling of a RE-presentation -- a
RE-membering? [Note that I emphasize the "RE." I do this to hit on that aspect
of my construction of CONSTRUCTION which allows us to function as if every
construction is assembled, proactively, on-the-spot as we go about attempting
to RE-present the distal ecology. By this formulation, then, we emphasize the
contextual aspects of construction building. Every construction is built on
the spot. Constructions are not RE-trieved -- that is RE-found!!!!]
Now, returning to the CONSTRUCTION "constructs," can we say that a
CONSTRUCTION refers to an assemblage of constructs. The input has been located
at one or another point along the continuum of each two-poled construct. Thus,
we have a CONSTRUCTION.

These formulations of CONSTRUCTIONS and CONSTRUCTS become complicated
because one of the ends of many CONSTRUCTS can stand as a CONSTRUCTION. One of
the most complicated CONSTRUCTS used by humans -- I would claim -- would be
OTHER-SELF. Now, SELF, as one end of the two-poled construct, must be regarded
as a very complex CONSTRUCTION -- constantly "membered" and RE-membered [that
is, assembled from the MEMBERS -- the CONSTRUCTS --- which have been found
useful in CONSTRUCTING the SELF].

So, one end of many [perhaps most] of the CONSTRUCTS we use in
assembling our CONSTRUCTIONS would be regarded as a CONSTRUCTION.

What is stable about PERSON???? His/her system of constructs!!!!!

Now we need to speak of cabbages and kings and all sorts of things --
such as HIERARCHICAL ORGANIZATIONS, ALIGNMENT OF POLARITIES, RANGE OF
CONVENIENCE, INDIVIDUALITY, etc., etc.

We have one useful theory here!!!!

Jim Mancuso


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%