Changes

====5.1.2. Conscious Reflection====

====5.1.2. Conscious Reflection====

In this Section I examine how the intellectual process of reflection is expressed in reflective writing.  Not so much as materials for analysis, since the power of analysis present in this work remains in a primitive state, but more to provide a constant reminder of what a reflective text is like, I am taking my epitext from the lifelong work of a single author, who made the aim of reflection an integral part of a whole life's work.

In this Section I examine how the intellectual process of reflection is expressed in reflective writing.  Not so much as materials for analysis, since the power of analysis present in this work remains in a primitive state, but more to provide a constant reminder of what a reflective text is like, I am taking my epitext from the lifelong work of a single author, who made the aim of reflection an integral part of a whole life's work.

The thesis that is developing here is this:  Language users have an innate knowledge of the "situation of communication" (SOC), a knowledge that is built into the language itself and gives its users an inkling of the social setting of communication that the language is meant to serve.  Such a knowledge is tantamount to a science of communication that its users develop from its initial state by dint or by virtue of using it.  Language users possess an intuitive, if imperfect, appreciation of the forms that are inherent in the social "task of communication" (TOC), and they exercise an implicit, if incipient, understanding of the practical roles that are constrained by the social "hold of communication" (HOC).  Although every language user actualizes these roles with more or less competence and participates in the requisite forms of relationship with more or less cognizance, it is poets, playwrights, programmers, policy analysts, and other sorts of reflective writers that are especially charged to articulate these forms in a relatively explicit fashion.

The thesis that is developing here is this:  Language users have an innate knowledge of the ''situation of communication'' (SOC), a knowledge that is built into the language itself and gives its users an inkling of the social setting of communication that the language is meant to serve.  Such a knowledge is tantamount to a science of communication that its users develop from its initial state by dint or by virtue of using it.  Language users possess an intuitive, if imperfect, appreciation of the forms that are inherent in the social ''task of communication'' (TOC), and they exercise an implicit, if incipient, understanding of the practical roles that are constrained by the social ''hold of communication'' (HOC).  Although every language user actualizes these roles with more or less competence and participates in the requisite forms of relationship with more or less cognizance, it is poets, playwrights, programmers, policy analysts, and other sorts of reflective writers that are especially charged to articulate these forms in a relatively explicit fashion.

The fact that reflective writers are driven to comment on the SOC itself, even if it is not always desirable or feasible to do so straightforwardly, and the fact that perceptive writers are able to find symbols of the SOC in the most inobvious places, reflected in the most refractory settings, and even when its likenesses are cast into the most unlikely images — these are two of the factors that combine to give creative writing its notably recursive and often cryptic character.

The fact that reflective writers are driven to comment on the SOC itself, even if it is not always desirable or feasible to do so straightforwardly, and the fact that perceptive writers are able to find symbols of the SOC in the most inobvious places, reflected in the most refractory settings, and even when its likenesses are cast into the most unlikely images — these are two of the factors that combine to give creative writing its notably recursive and often cryptic character.

A reflective writer converts a "situation of communication" (SOC), a type of object, into a "communication of situation" (COS), a type of sign, and links the succession of reflective signs into the ongoing reflective text.  But what are the forces that force a text, developing freely in a medium of communication, furnishing the vehicle of an observation, and bearing the impression of an object that occasions it, to double back on its writer and itself, to turn back through the medium of communication, all to form a sign for itself and to make a name for its author?

A reflective writer converts a ''situation of communication'' (SOC), a type of object, into a ''communication of situation'' (COS), a type of sign, and links the succession of reflective signs into the ongoing reflective text.  But what are the forces that force a text, developing freely in a medium of communication, furnishing the vehicle of an observation, and bearing the impression of an object that occasions it, to double back on its writer and itself, to turn back through the medium of communication, all to form a sign for itself and to make a name for its author?

The relevance of reflective writing to the inquiry into inquiry can be seen in the following way.  Let one examine a reflective text, a sample from the work of a suitably reflective writer, and one often discovers, besides the interpretation that bears on the obvious subject and serves to carry the ostensible theme, that there is coded or woven through the covering text a comment on the SOC itself, that is, a reflection on the writer, the reader, and the text itself.  This reflexive interpretation reveals the writer's impressions about the process of writing, the very process that led to the text as its end result.

The relevance of reflective writing to the inquiry into inquiry can be seen in the following way.  Let one examine a reflective text, a sample from the work of a suitably reflective writer, and one often discovers, besides the interpretation that bears on the obvious subject and serves to carry the ostensible theme, that there is coded or woven through the covering text a comment on the SOC itself, that is, a reflection on the writer, the reader, and the text itself.  This reflexive interpretation reveals the writer's impressions about the process of writing, the very process that led to the text as its end result.

By tracing the analogies that exist between reflective writing and the inquiry into inquiry it is possible to gain a measure of insight into the character of the latter task.  It is not a strange circumstance for the life and work of a writer to be represented again in that work, indeed, to be critically reflected there.  And there is no question that a text can be used by a writer to talk about itself and its author, in a way that conceivably makes sense of them both — the question is whether what a reflexive text says can be interpreted in the same way as a text about external objects, or has to be taken with a distinct grain of salt.

By tracing the analogies that exist between reflective writing and the inquiry into inquiry it is possible to gain a measure of insight into the character of the latter task.  It is not a strange circumstance for the life and work of a writer to be represented again in that work, indeed, to be critically reflected there.  And there is no question that a text can be used by a writer to talk about itself and its author, in a way that conceivably makes sense of them both — the question is whether what a reflexive text says can be interpreted in the same way as a text about external objects, or has to be taken with a distinct grain of salt.

Reflective writing arises from reflection on life and conduct and issues in a description of what goes on in the scene surrounding the reflective writer's "point of view" (POV).  Of course, among the forms of conduct that are subject to inspection, a piece of reflective writing can also reflect on the process of writing itself, detailing the conditions that affect its intentions and its outcome, and thus taking on a "reflexive" character, though it is customary to express these narrower reflections in any number of less direct manners.  With regard to the scene about a POV, a piece of reflective writing can take any stance from admiring, to amused, to bemused, to critical, to simply trying to puzzle out a fraction of what is going on.  With respect to the process of writing and the development of a writer, a piece of reflective writing and what it articulates can be a crucial part of changing or preserving a POV.  From this description, it ought to be clear that reflective writing is a naturally occurring species of inquiry into inquiry.  That is to say, in analyzing the varieties of syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic phenomena that occur in reflective writing, one is performing a task that parallels the inquiry into inquiry.

Reflective writing arises from reflection on life and conduct and issues in a description of what goes on in the scene surrounding the reflective writer's ''point of view'' (POV).  Of course, among the forms of conduct that are subject to inspection, a piece of reflective writing can also reflect on the process of writing itself, detailing the conditions that affect its intentions and its outcome, and thus taking on a “reflexive” character, though it is customary to express these narrower reflections in any number of less direct manners.  With regard to the scene about a POV, a piece of reflective writing can take any stance from admiring, to amused, to bemused, to critical, to simply trying to puzzle out a fraction of what is going on.  With respect to the process of writing and the development of a writer, a piece of reflective writing and what it articulates can be a crucial part of changing or preserving a POV.  From this description, it ought to be clear that reflective writing is a naturally occurring species of inquiry into inquiry.  That is to say, in analyzing the varieties of syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic phenomena that occur in reflective writing, one is performing a task that parallels the inquiry into inquiry.

Notions of "recursion", informally taken, arise in this discussion for several reasons.  First, there is the appearance of self application that is involved in an inquiry into inquiry, in the idea that an instrumental activity called "inquiry" can have application to an objective argument called "inquiry" and yield a meaningful result.  Second, there is the appearance of self reference that is involved in an inquiry into inquiry, in the fact that a textual record of a self described inquiry needs to refer to itself as falling under the general topic of inquiry.

Notions of recursion, informally taken, arise in this discussion for several reasons.  First, there is the appearance of self application that is involved in an inquiry into inquiry, in the idea that an instrumental activity called “inquiry” can have application to an objective argument called “inquiry” and yield a meaningful result.  Second, there is the appearance of self reference that is involved in an inquiry into inquiry, in the fact that a textual record of a self described inquiry needs to refer to itself as falling under the general topic of inquiry.

Strictly speaking, the themes of self application and self reference are less properly described as "recursive" than "reflective" or "reflexive", but it is easy to see how these issues arise in the process of carrying out a genuinely recursive project in an effectively pragmatic context.   

Strictly speaking, the themes of self application and self reference are less properly described as ''recursive'' than ''reflective'' or ''reflexive'', but it is easy to see how these issues arise in the process of carrying out a genuinely recursive project in an effectively pragmatic context.   

In order to do this, I need to give a rough description of these two ideas, that of a recursive project and that of a pragmatic context.

In order to do this, I need to give a rough description of these two ideas, that of a recursive project and that of a pragmatic context.

1. In a recursive project, one attempts to clarify a complex concept in terms of simpler concepts.  For instance, an important special case occurs when one tries to analyze a complex process in terms of simpler processes.  A recursive project recurs upon a type of situation where the "same" concept is applied to simpler objects, in particular, where the same process, procedure, or function is applied to simpler arguments, proceeding to increasingly simpler arguments until the simplest arguments are reached.  A recursive project is sound if there is a bound that can be wound around it, and it redounds to good effect if there is a ground that can be found to found it.

# In a recursive project, one attempts to clarify a complex concept in terms of simpler concepts.  For instance, an important special case occurs when one tries to analyze a complex process in terms of simpler processes.  A recursive project recurs upon a type of situation where the ''same'' concept is applied to simpler objects, in particular, where the same process, procedure, or function is applied to simpler arguments, proceeding to increasingly simpler arguments until the simplest arguments are reached.  A recursive project is sound if there is a bound that can be wound around it, and it redounds to good effect if there is a ground that can be found to found it.

# In a pragmatic context, the canonical way to clarify any concept is to give it an effective representation or an operational definition, that is, to detail the effects that the object of the concept is conceived to have when it is applied to the objects available in a specifiable variety of practical situations.  An interpretive agent that follows this pragmatic prescription for clarifying concepts, persisting at it long enough and pursuing it through an adequate array of applications, can convert each concept analyzed into its corresponding "active formula".  This is a form of expression that is logically equivalent, or as nearly as possible, to the intended concept, but suitable for immediate application to the contemplated domain of objects.

Now, consider the concept of inquiry as a candidate for clarification.  In the case of a concept like inquiry, the object of the concept in question is an activity that applies to the broadest conceivable variety of objects, one of these arguments being the topic of inquiry itself.  As a result, if one approaches a definition of inquiry by way of the pragmatic prescription for clarifying concepts, one quickly discovers that an important ingredient in the active formula for inquiry is a component that characterizes the concept ''inquiry'' in terms of its action on itself.

 

Now, consider the concept of "inquiry" as a candidate for clarification.  In the case of a concept like "inquiry", the object of the concept in question is an activity that applies to the broadest conceivable variety of objects, one of these arguments being the topic of "inquiry" itself.  As a result, if one approaches a definition of inquiry by way of the pragmatic prescription for clarifying concepts, one quickly discovers that an important ingredient in the active formula for inquiry is a component that characterizes the concept "inquiry" in terms of its action on itself.

What does the object denoted by "inquiry" have to do with respect to the object denoted by "inquiry", in the first place, to qualify as a genuine inquiry, in the end, to succeed as an inquiry into inquiry?  Evidently, something about the sign, the object, or what transpires between the sign and the object is conducive to attaining a better description of inquiry than that given by the mere name "inquiry".  The word "inquiry" and the symbol "y" are like a host of difficult signs, starting with "I" and "you", where knowing the sign does not mean knowing the object perfectly, although it can lead to a knowledge of it.  Simply knowing the word "I" and being able to use it adequately does not mean that I know myself perfectly, or that I can articulate my own nature.  At best, these signs can serve to indicate the direction of the object pointed out or help to remind an agent of the action that is called for to be carried out.

What does the object denoted by "inquiry" have to do with respect to the object denoted by "inquiry", in the first place, to qualify as a genuine inquiry, in the end, to succeed as an inquiry into inquiry?  Evidently, something about the sign, the object, or what transpires between the sign and the object is conducive to attaining a better description of inquiry than that given by the mere name "inquiry".  The word "inquiry" and the symbol "y" are like a host of difficult signs, starting with "I" and "you", where knowing the sign does not mean knowing the object perfectly, although it can lead to a knowledge of it.  Simply knowing the word "I" and being able to use it adequately does not mean that I know myself perfectly, or that I can articulate my own nature.  At best, these signs can serve to indicate the direction of the object pointed out or help to remind an agent of the action that is called for to be carried out.