Trying to post a comment to Jyri Engeström‘s weblog but “typepad is down” at the moment. 🙁 Anyway, it’s below. Found him via Lilia’s post on Living Relationships. Need to go back over the Powerpoints etc.
I just found myself hung up on what Oleg K describes as “the phenomenological insight that there is no such thing as an object without an obejctivation, in other words, it’s all about what processes are made possible by the object-actor-action relations.” Trying to think of how to define a “research object” for a project regarding the transition from computer-mediated communication to face-to-face comm for persons with disabilities… certain processes are “made possible” by cmc that are unavailable ftf, but the ultimate goal of accessible technology isn’t “just” to make people with disabilities more independent or self-sufficient (although these are important goals) – it’s also to be a bridge that enables more direct, ftf, forms of relating. Where my co-author and I draw the lines of objectivation will both highlight an aspect we think is important, and obscure other aspects that we don’t recognize and/or give a lesser value too – perhaps erroneously!