Monday, October 03, 2005

Shore made his case

Wow, I'm pretty convinced of the inextricable connection among cognition, meaning and culture. Each informs the other, so how could any researcher claim to study just one?

Shore definitely made his case with me. His use of examples that were both familiar (TV, furniture, technology) and unfamiliar (the concept of liminality, totems, stories from other cultures) helped me grasp the breadth of his argument. Reading the modularity section, it occured to me that American culture has become even more modular--now we have modular careers instead of long-term relationships with one employer, and we even have modular families.

In a previous class session, the topic of more women in their 20s and early 30s leaving the workforce to stay home with their children was brought up. I wonder how Shore would connect this apparant trend to the "extreme" modularity of the American culture. Is it just a case of history repeating itself (circa 1940s & 50s) or is the US culture shifting in response to new/revised meanings related to female self-concept and family?


Blogger asw said...

Your question at the end of your post regarding the trend in the modularity of American culture of the female and family is an interesting aspect to analyze using Shore's framework.

I am wondering how well this aspect could be understood by reviewing one of the models he suggests in Chapter 2 - perhaps a combination of the nonlinguistic and linguistic as well as the orientational models? I am wondering how much the aspect of connectionism can play a role in demonstrating the cultural meaning of "modularity" in the American family and how this connects to the female and how this has come to change over the decades?

11:32 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home