Don't worry this is not a chapter-by-chapter review. Having cast the stone that is Hodges' model we will skip a few times.
The use of footnotes varies from chapter to chapter. They inform the text, in several instances being quite illuminating. Beside the footnote (1/3 of a page) I noted - 'baby, cacophony, perception - brain - not overwhelmed but can't ignore' (p.41). Stoicism is the focus in chapter 3; perception, fields, manifold, circles of care, self, time, situation! We have field, subfields, domains.
"Perception is always about a diagnosis of the situation in which the living being finds itself. ...
... perception is always about finding one's "whereabouts" or one's "location" in life's journey." p.42.
On the features of perception, 4/4: "might be termed the breadth or width of the perceptual field." p.42.
"As pointed out above, all perception has the structure of a compact, continuous, and uninterrupted manifold. In other words, it forms what we have termed a field. But the perceptual field could contain nothing but the "bare bones" of "inert" qualia, (a manifold of simple qualities impinging themselves upon the perceiver)." p.42.
The author, Jorge de Carvalho continues another view of qualities that take place in "each given moment". This is the challenge of salience, what is significant? How to 'read' in care: the spoken, the unspoken?
Developing notes on Hodges' model as a mathematical object, Hodges' model in its basic form as a template, I'm proposing as an empty set. The structure of Hodges' model, its two axes instantiate the "bare bones". In programming/instruction terms ... Hodges' model provides INITIALISATION. A reset. This can act as a prompt for learners to acknowledge the person - the other and consider 'unconditional positive regard'. There's polarity too (p.46) and each living being lives in its own global field, in its own global 'map' - in its own geography" (p.49). Physical geography and the change 'there' is giving rise to cogeographical (a neologism?) disruption - eco-anxiety and climate-angst.
Psycho-geography: the polarity of our times?
Another note, amongst Hierocles' circles is 'reflex arc'. So many feedback loops, cascades to worry about.
As Jorge de Carvalho writes: 'what we are talking about is a very complex field of fields. ... described both as a compass rose and as a framework of concentric circles" (p.51). [There's a relay race, a torch relay in ancient terms p.54. Care is the object that is passed on. I've a dual-shaped baton to pass on.]
Care is more than perception (p.52), care presupposes a degree of activity or action. I like the acknowledgement of 'vigilant waiting' too. For me this draws in the importance of communication; Watzlawick's Five Axioms of Communication. After all, what happens to all these perceptions? There's vulnerability, fragility and care for the sheer existence and the whole content of a given being (p.56). Jorge de Carvalho, deploys a series of numbered points which helps reading. Page 60's footnote had me drawing circles, unborn at the centre: as one. But the collective unborn in another rough circle. Eachtimeness: I like this Stoic formulation through circles. Fourthly, we arrive at pure care. I'm still pondering on ".. there is no absolute either/or dichotomy between care and its opposite" (p.61). Integration is also here, an issue for modern times, a legacy problem from ancient times?
Luis Mendes's chapter I must read again. The abstract includes:
"Three fundamental aspects will be identified: (a) the need to consider self-existence from a global point of view; (b) the need for an axis for that life-view; (c) the need for correspondence between self-existence and life-view. Apparently, this structure is formal and arbitrary. Secondly, I will analyse the structure of despair. Three fundamental aspects will be analysed: (α) the requirement for a life-view which can be applied to the totality of subjective existence; (β) the requirement for an unconditioned instance of meaning; (γ) the requirement for the exclusion of the possibility of failure." p.79.
I'm sure Kierkegaard has featured in Philosophy Now, and The Philosophers' Magazine. Mendes' focus is arbitrariness. The hypothesis is well explained (p.80) structure of care. There's much for me here: care, life-view (health career - life chances), "a global understanding maps the world" (p.81), existential map, fulfilment, meaning (of course!). Reading -
"So, a life-view needs to be stabilized, to have unity. It needs an instance that works as an axis and as a point of support. We need something to support our life" (p.83).
I could have jumped up, waved and shouted "OVER HERE!" Would Kierkegaard have been pleased? Perhaps I should have read Kierkegaard, not Michel Serres (please see bibliography in the sidebar)? Still time (fingers x'd); especially if there's any interest in the form of co-author(s)? Care is full of ideals. Mendes through Kierkegaard gives my project encouragement: "Truth is to live for an idea." p.84. Not necessarily truth but the idealism in care, including identity. It is helpful in care to be reminded of the ideal as a calling, hence motivation (intrinsic and extrinsic) is still key. If you're intrinsically motivated, devoted to your chosen vocation, is your pay that important - to the government/organisation that employs you? A shame this is so often lost to political leaders; who, given their chosen vocation, exhibit a markedly short memory.
Braga, J. & Santiago de Carvalho, M. (Eds.), (2021) Philosophy of care: New approaches to vulnerability, otherness therapy. Springer.
orcid.org/0000-0002-0192-8965
