[MD] Step two

[Craig Erb]

 [Arlo]
>
The basis for social patterns is, IMHO, "activity" (in the Russian sense; 
> purposeful, agenic, semiotic, mediated). And the root, the carbon atom,
> for activity is shared attention.

 
[Craig, previously]
 
> IMHO the root of social activity is shared INtention, rather than shared 
> ATtention.  Two people aware of each other watching a bird are not 
> necessarily engaged in a social activity, but merely a biological activity.
> It only becomes a ritual if there is shared intention.
 
[Arlo]
> shared attention depends on recognizing that, like you, the 'other' is 
> acting with intention.  But, I think he would say that two people watching > a bird would be social if (1) as mentioned both recognize each other in 
> that moment as intentional agents in the world, and (2) both recognize 
> that they are sharing a social-semiotic reaction to the attentional 'object'. > That they DON'T act together in that moment is overshadowed by that  > they COULD act in that moment. Like I said, I don't think we are in 
> disagreement in substance, maybe just in terminology. 
 
We might call such situations 'social', but they need something additional to categorize them as third level spovs rather than mere 2nd level.
Craig