[Xmca-l] Re: "The political" and "power" in learning

[Zavala, Miguel]

Thanks Dana for sorting this new thread.  Mike, I'll follow up with the
articles you mention...

I am also pressed for time so will be somewhat slow in replying.  I see
the threads are like roundtables or spaces within a larger venue, a
thinking conference.

Miguel

On 12/1/14 6:07 PM, "mike cole" <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:

>I fully agree, Dana. Several interconnected issues that Miguel is raising
>are of central concern to xmca.
>
>Miguel--
>
>I think that the notion of decolonializing pedagogy relates in pretty
>direct way with Maisha Winn's ideas of  African Diaspora Participatory
>Literacy. She writes about that in the next issue of MCA. I also like the
>idea of autobiographical accounts of one's own positionality with respect
>to the events that have shaped your scholarship. There is an interesting
>article by a group of South African pedagogs that illustrates again, what
>seems like, a similar idea of locating one's academic work within the
>context of one's political engagements. And then we are gifted with Paul's
>article in a journal devoted to the centrality of class in a journal
>entitled *African and Black Diaspora. *
>
>Synchronic a-causality or Zeitgeist?
>mike
>
>
>
>On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Walker, Dana <Dana.Walker@unco.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hi Miguel,
>>
>> I would be very interested in continuing this thread on "the political"
>> and "power" in learning. My participation will be slow, as I will be at
>> the LRA conference in Florida and then finals and so on, but will follow
>> with interest. I have changed thread title in anticipation of pursuing
>> this exploration.
>>
>> Does Ferguson (or Oakland, or New York, or Hong Kong, or Cairo) matter
>>in
>> considerations of 'the political' and 'power' in learning (and
>>teaching)?
>>
>> Dana
>>
>> On 11/28/14 5:07 PM, "Zavala, Miguel" <mizavala@exchange.fullerton.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi Dana,
>> >
>> >I believe there are several ways to go with an analysis of "the
>>political"
>> >or "power" in learning.  First, is to search for its
>> >articulation/theorization in existing studies (whether conceptual or
>> >empirical) within the learning sciences more generally. Who has
>>attempted
>> >this work? Also, In the general absence of studies theorizing "the
>> >political" or "power" in learning (which I gather is an accurate
>>depiction
>> >of the field), one might pursue the ways in which "context" is narrowly
>> >framed in distinct frames/theories of learning.  In what ways does/can
>> >CHAT enable the analysis of "the political" and "power" in learning?
>> >
>> >Now, due to time constraints, this project may take time; perhaps
>>there is
>> >a smaller group that would like to continue with this
>>thread/exploration
>> >of "the political" or "power" in learning. I place questions of
>>politics
>> >and power in quotation marks because they need to be unpacked, like
>>many
>> >concepts.
>> >
>> >I believe there is another route one can take, and that is to begin
>>with
>> >our own political biographies, how we view the world and its
>> >transformation. In a sense, we all have our biographies of coming to
>>CHAT.
>> >How is CHAT a tool in our practical work (as educators,
>> >action-researchers, community organizers, etc.)?  Because processes are
>> >relational, I imagine that our own biographies, positionalities, and
>> >standpoints (which function more like collective consciousness and
>> >practices, borrowing here from the work of Sandra Harding) are not only
>> >inflected in our appropriations of CHAT but are interwoven; they shift
>> >from "external" to "internal" processes of of both research and praxis
>> >(informed by our politics).  I recognize there are many points being
>>made
>> >here and "dangers", especially when one views learning as a-political
>>or
>> >mechanistic, but I take that risk.
>> >
>> >Attached is a chapter outlining my political philosophy. It was
>>published
>> >as part of a text that asked contributors to name our "pedagogic
>>creeds"
>> >(á la Dewey).
>> >
>> >-Miguel
>> >
>> >
>> >On 11/27/14 8:12 AM, "Walker, Dana" <Dana.Walker@unco.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Gracias Miguel, and Mike and Larry for responding and for moving
>>forward
>> >>this thread of thought begun by Annalisa.
>> >>
>> >>Miguel, I remember now (based on a conference presentation of yours
>>years
>> >>ago) that your pedagogical and theoretical work involving migrant
>> >>students
>> >>at UCLA addressed questions of power, subjectivity, and embodied
>>selves
>> >>in
>> >>boundary crossing processes in ways that other CHAT theorists (e.g.,
>> >>Tuomi-Grohn & Engestrom, 2003; Grossen & Zittoun, 2012) do not.  I
>>wonder
>> >>if this is a place where we could begin exploring the question of
>>power
>> >>in
>> >>relation to learning and development? Is there an article of yours
>>that
>> >>you might suggest on this subject?
>> >>
>> >>Dana
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>On 11/27/14 12:02 AM, "Zavala, Miguel"
>><mizavala@exchange.fullerton.edu>
>> >>wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Gracias Annalisa and Dana.
>> >>>
>> >>>Questions of power have always been central to my work and I am a new
>> >>>member of this list (and community) and don't have a broader context
>>as
>> >>>to
>> >>>why it was created and whether it is by design meant to grow in its
>>own
>> >>>way over time, etc. What I have noticed though is a tendency to
>>focus on
>> >>>conceptual clarity (of the work of Vygotsky and Cultural Historical
>> >>>Activity Theory and prior, such as Marx). So, I am learning anew in
>>this
>> >>>space, taking notes, re-reading.  In many ways it reminds me of the
>>CHAT
>> >>>reading group many of us at UCLA visualized but never materialized
>> >>>formally, except that our reading and writing the world with
>>Vygotsky's
>> >>>ideas (and others) did materialize in the beautiful pedagogical work
>>we
>> >>>did with migrant students at that time...
>> >>>
>> >>>I hope the question of how we use, expand, enrich, re-envision, and
>> >>>carry
>> >>>forward the ideas of Vygotsky (and how these intersect with or
>> >>>interweave
>> >>>with power) are considered in an open and non-controlled way.  By
>> >>>"non-controlled" I mean the parallel tendency in particular
>> >>>circles/communities to challenge work that grows out of particular
>>ideas
>> >>>and if those ideas do not adhere to some party-line (or experts on
>>said
>> >>>theory don't agree on it) then such work should not define itself as
>> >>>"Vygotskian", "CHAT-based", or "Socio-Cultural," etc. My own
>>motivation
>> >>>to
>> >>>chime in and contribute would increase if we followed this strand,
>>that
>> >>>looks at power and how it is integral to (not a 'factor' or
>>'external'
>> >>>context) learningŠ Although the reading group orientation is still
>> >>>useful.
>> >>>
>> >>>Warmly,
>> >>>
>> >>>Miguel Zavala
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>On 11/26/14 10:38 PM, "Walker, Dana" <Dana.Walker@unco.edu> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>Before we leave this topic, I would like to suggest that we pause to
>> >>>>consider Annalisa's question:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>I'm curious how others have been inspired by Vygotsky and
>> >>>>sociocultural theory, and even other manifestations of his ideas,
>>such
>> >>>>as
>> >>>>CHAT, etc and how people are using these approaches in their work.
>>What
>> >>>>is
>> >>>>that like for you? And to be more specific, what is that like for
>>women
>> >>>>and
>> >>>>people of color? I'm also interested in thinking-out-loud with
>>others
>> >>>>about
>> >>>>Vygotskian concepts that are not easy to understand; to employ in
>>real
>> >>>>time
>> >>>>dialogue and social interaction to leap over zopeds together. Isn't
>> >>>>that
>> >>>>what a listserv is for? Or am I being too idealistic?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>For many years I have wondered why the participants on this list so
>> >>>>seldom
>> >>>>talk from contextualized positions, specifically positioning the
>>self
>> >>>>in
>> >>>>relation to others and to power relations shaped by race, class,
>> >>>>gender,
>> >>>>and so on.  I am myself very aware of power relations being played
>>out
>> >>>>through the discursive positioning of people in this space, which is
>> >>>>why
>> >>>>I
>> >>>>choose not to speak. I am wondering if any of the subscribers to
>>this
>> >>>>list
>> >>>>are interested such questions, including the one framed by Annalisa
>> >>>>above?
>> >>>>Kris Gutierrez is the only one I know of in CHAT/sociocultural
>>theory
>> >>>>who
>> >>>>deals with these issues, for example in her article "Developing a
>> >>>>Sociocritical Literacy in the Third Space"(2008). But I'm sure there
>> >>>>are
>> >>>>others.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Dana
>> >>>>
>> >>>>On 11/26/14 10:49 PM, "Carol Macdonald" <carolmacdon@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>Hi
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>There have been some off list postings about this phenomenon. None
>>of
>> >>>>>it
>> >>>>>complimentary.  This cannot be sorted out in one move.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>I propose that we move onto a different thread -  topic.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Mike, would you like to start us off on something new?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Carol
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>On 27 November 2014 at 02:49, Martin John Packer
>> >>>>><mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
>> >>>>>wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Andy, if you're going to retire, then retire. But don't aim one
>>or
>> >>>>>>two
>> >>>>>> more underhand blows behind the feint of retiring.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Martin
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Nov 26, 2014, at 7:24 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> > Well this bloke will retire again at this point. I thought for
>>a
>> >>>>>>brief
>> >>>>>> moment there, I thought we had a breakthrough. Certainly, Huw's
>> >>>>>>"real
>> >>>>>> illusion" is perfectly apt to my mind (it's an expression Marx
>> >>>>>>uses),
>> >>>>>>or
>> >>>>>> in  Eric Fromm's words, an illusion with "survival value." Martin
>> >>>>>>says
>> >>>>>> "Consciousness is an objective process that *sometimes* can *give
>> >>>>>>rise
>> >>>>>>to*
>> >>>>>> illusions." As Vygotsky says "For him psychology is partly
>> >>>>>>phenomenology."
>> >>>>>> > Andy
>> >>>>>> >
>> 
>>>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>--
>> >>>>>>-
>> >>>>>>-
>> >>>>>>-
>> >>>>>> > *Andy Blunden*
>> >>>>>> > http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> > Bruce Robinson wrote:
>> >>>>>> >> Henry,
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >> Your wife's question leads to another: who speaks for the
>>silent
>> >>>>>> majority, many of whom, like me, must be getting fed up with what
>> >>>>>>David
>> >>>>>>K
>> >>>>>> calls a "rather blokish struggle for power over particular
>>words'?
>> >>>>>>[Not
>> >>>>>> Richard Nixon :)]
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >> Bruce R
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >> PS: You may also note that I have not changed the subject
>>heading
>> >>>>>>of
>> >>>>>> this message so that it bears no relation to the content.
>>Something
>> >>>>>>else I
>> >>>>>> find irritating...
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >> On 26/11/2014 17:16, HENRY SHONERD wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>> Sister Analisa,
>> >>>>>> >>> Thank you for responding! I was just talking to my wife
>>(getting
>> >>>>>> personal!) about the chat. She asked me, "How does anyone get to
>> >>>>>> participate in the (XMCA) chat if only a few people take part?" I
>> >>>>>>wondered
>> >>>>>> in my email below if too much was expected of written
>>communication
>> >>>>>>in
>> >>>>>>the
>> >>>>>> XMCA chat. With 800 people potentially taking turns, well...what
>>is
>> >>>>>>even
>> >>>>>> possible logistically? Mike Cole has talked about this, and, I
>> >>>>>>think,
>> >>>>>>has
>> >>>>>> some suggestions on how to deal with the bottlenecking. But even
>> >>>>>>small
>> >>>>>> scale communication can be daunting. I watched, with my wife, a
>> >>>>>>Richard
>> >>>>>> Linklater movie last night, "Before Midnight". Two people, face
>>to
>> >>>>>>face, in
>> >>>>>> a totally committed relationship, smart people, good people,
>>trying
>> >>>>>>so
>> >>>>>>hard
>> >>>>>> to get it right. Always a work in progress. But it's worth it.
>>The
>> >>>>>> alternative is despair. I am sure of this: This chat, which
>>seems to
>> >>>>>>get
>> >>>>>> bogged down in abstractions, pure thinking in the mud, is really
>> >>>>>> consequential beyond the sensitivities of academics. I said we
>> >>>>>> >> va
>> >>>>>> >>>  lue Vygotsky's "heroism", but that's too macho. I should
>>have
>> >>>>>>said
>> >>>>>> courage.
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> The Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis is a powerful idea,
>>often
>> >>>>>>called
>> >>>>>> the Whorf/Sapir hypothesis. Google it. Really. See what you
>>think.
>> >>>>>>One
>> >>>>>> gauge of the power of an idea is if it has found its way into
>> >>>>>>popular
>> >>>>>> discourse. I just this morning heard an NPR radio program (thanks
>> >>>>>>again
>> >>>>>>to
>> >>>>>> my wife, who was listening when she heard something she thought I
>> >>>>>>would
>> >>>>>>be
>> >>>>>> interested in) that dealt with the Whorf/Sapir hypothesis in its
>> >>>>>>strong
>> >>>>>>and
>> >>>>>> weak form.
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> Henry
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> On Nov 25, 2014, at 10:11 PM, Annalisa Aguilar
>> >>>>>><annalisa@unm.edu>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Dear Henry,
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Thank you for your reply.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> I don't think being personal (or even personable) requires
>> >>>>>>being
>> >>>>>> heated. Does this have to do with my comment of warmth as a sign
>>of
>> >>>>>>welcome?
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> To speak about culture non-personally is not something I am
>> >>>>>>adept
>> >>>>>>at
>> >>>>>> doing. We are always speaking from where we stand, the culture
>>that
>> >>>>>>we
>> >>>>>>are
>> >>>>>> in or from, what-have-you.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Respectfully, I do not know what "linguistic relativity
>> >>>>>>hypothesis"
>> >>>>>> is. So please be patient with me while I connect this academic
>>idea
>> >>>>>>you
>> >>>>>> have offered to this conversation so that I can relate that to my
>> >>>>>>personal
>> >>>>>> experience speaking on this thread, though clearly I'm not
>>speaking
>> >>>>>> literally right now, but it is speech from me, not a sock puppet
>> >>>>>>with
>> >>>>>>my
>> >>>>>> voice thrown from the position of objective reality.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> You are talking about speaking two languages. But it seems
>>we
>> >>>>>>are
>> >>>>>>all
>> >>>>>> speaking English on this list. So I'm a bit lost right there what
>> >>>>>>you
>> >>>>>>are
>> >>>>>> trying to say to me.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Then, you speak of metalinguistics and how it represents
>> >>>>>>different
>> >>>>>> worldviews, if you don't mind me swapping your use of
>>"perspective"
>> >>>>>>for
>> >>>>>> worldview. There is a lot of time clearing muckups to get it
>>right.
>> >>>>>>I'm
>> >>>>>>not
>> >>>>>> sure that it ever gets right though, which troubles me. I have
>>found
>> >>>>>>that
>> >>>>>> many people who have different worldviews communicate by "talking
>> >>>>>>to,"
>> >>>>>> rather than "talking at." I feel, for example, you and I are
>>talking
>> >>>>>>to
>> >>>>>>one
>> >>>>>> another, despite our likely different POVs.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> I don't know what the "perish and dapple of Andy" means when
>> >>>>>>you
>> >>>>>>say
>> >>>>>> that. From what I can tell he's trying to define something for
>> >>>>>>himself
>> >>>>>> asking for the help of others. That's fine and I'm learning that
>> >>>>>> definitions are very bas-relief for him. I think my interests
>>are a
>> >>>>>>little
>> >>>>>> different. So I'd prefer to orient to my interests, if that is
>>OK.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Speaking of metalinguistics, rather than debate over
>> >>>>>>definitions,
>> >>>>>>I'm
>> >>>>>> more interested in speaking to the very different people who are
>>on
>> >>>>>>this
>> >>>>>> list. The rumor is there are 800 folks out there. Where are you?
>>:)
>> >>>>>>To
>> >>>>>> reference a highly academic quote from the Wizard of Oz:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> "Come out, come out wherever you are, and meet the young
>>lady
>> >>>>>>who
>> >>>>>> fell from the star!"
>> >>>>>> >>>> --Glinda, the Good Witch from the North (waves magic wand)
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> I'm curious how others have been inspired by Vygotsky and
>> >>>>>> sociocultural theory, and even other manifestations of his ideas,
>> >>>>>>such
>> >>>>>>as
>> >>>>>> CHAT, etc and how people are using these approaches in their
>>work.
>> >>>>>>What
>> >>>>>>is
>> >>>>>> that like for you? And to be more specific, what is that like for
>> >>>>>>women
>> >>>>>>and
>> >>>>>> people of color? I'm also interested in thinking-out-loud with
>> >>>>>>others
>> >>>>>>about
>> >>>>>> Vygotskian concepts that are not easy to understand; to employ in
>> >>>>>>real
>> >>>>>>time
>> >>>>>> dialogue and social interaction to leap over zopeds together.
>>Isn't
>> >>>>>>that
>> >>>>>> what a listserv is for? Or am I being too idealistic?
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> I have tried to speak in an open, easy, and immediate
>>manner,
>> >>>>>>to
>> >>>>>> allow others to engage. But I fear that engagement is never
>>going to
>> >>>>>>happen
>> >>>>>> because all that persists are conversations about definitions, or
>> >>>>>>whether
>> >>>>>> nothing can come from nothing, and voila! subsequent debates
>>ensue.
>> >>>>>>Or
>> >>>>>> someone will say, "We already discussed this 20 years ago!" Which
>> >>>>>>means
>> >>>>>>I
>> >>>>>> missed the party, I suppose. Unfortunately, if I disagree with a
>> >>>>>>position
>> >>>>>> because I interpret differently, then I'm told to go read
>>something
>> >>>>>>without
>> >>>>>> really a clear explanation why I'm supposed to go read something.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> I don't really agree with the approach of "read this," as an
>> >>>>>>academic
>> >>>>>> argument. Anyone is free to use it, and I have myself, but
>>because I
>> >>>>>>know
>> >>>>>> how obtuse that can be, I couch it with my reasons why I think it
>> >>>>>>would
>> >>>>>>be
>> >>>>>> a good read for that person, and what I think there is learn from
>> >>>>>>reading.
>> >>>>>> I think the "read this" approach, when it is offered with the
>>tone
>> >>>>>>of
>> >>>>>>"now
>> >>>>>> go eat your vegetables!" fails in the making of speech between
>> >>>>>>people.
>> >>>>>>All
>> >>>>>> it does is shut things down.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> If the reading truly is relevant, it seems far more
>>productive
>> >>>>>>in
>> >>>>>>the
>> >>>>>> moment of speech to cue a person what to look for, to supply a
>> >>>>>>context,
>> >>>>>> especially when referencing an entire book, for example, or the
>>link
>> >>>>>>to
>> >>>>>>an
>> >>>>>> entire website full of texts.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Your assessment in the physicality of language is something
>> >>>>>>with
>> >>>>>> which I am completely in agreement. Especially since we all seem
>>to
>> >>>>>>agree
>> >>>>>> with the material aspects of language. So the question at hand
>>is a
>> >>>>>>matter
>> >>>>>> of form. Form has an aesthetic but also has a purpose. Are we
>> >>>>>>throwing
>> >>>>>> ropes or throwing boulders? If throwing boulders, where does that
>> >>>>>>need
>> >>>>>>to
>> >>>>>> throw boulders come from? If throwing ropes, then at least
>> >>>>>>connections
>> >>>>>>are
>> >>>>>> being made for those who might not be very clear about ideas and
>>who
>> >>>>>>may
>> >>>>>> require a helping hand.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Then there's the old, but handy, elliptical comment,
>>something
>> >>>>>>like a
>> >>>>>> boomerang... meant to be subtle or ironic at the expense of
>>someone
>> >>>>>>who
>> >>>>>>may
>> >>>>>> not understand.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> At this point, I'd to emphasize that being ignorant is not
>> >>>>>>being
>> >>>>>> stupid, but it seems someone who is ignorant is frequently
>>treated
>> >>>>>>as
>> >>>>>> stupid (um, on this list). This "phenomenon" has made me reflect
>> >>>>>>upon
>> >>>>>>how
>> >>>>>> little time is spent upon the nature of ignorance in education
>>and
>> >>>>>>the
>> >>>>>> dynamics of ignorance in speaking. Every one of us is ignorant
>>about
>> >>>>>>most
>> >>>>>> things in the world. And yet being ignorant is seen as an
>> >>>>>>embarrassment, a
>> >>>>>> deficiency, a lapse in character. I vehemently disagree with this
>> >>>>>>reception
>> >>>>>> to ignorance. Even Einstein said something like, "The more I
>>know,
>> >>>>>>the
>> >>>>>>more
>> >>>>>> I see how much I don't know." Such an aggressive position toward
>> >>>>>>ignorance
>> >>>>>> is nothing but hurtful, even arrogant. Arrogance is a blister, a
>> >>>>>>defense
>> >>>>>> mechanism from previous hurt. A person who is honest about one's
>>own
>> >>>>>> ignorance is a very strong person and is showing a willingness to
>> >>>>>>learn
>> >>>>>> something. I think all teachers will agree that a person who
>>knows
>> >>>>>>one
>> >>>>>> doesn't know is an easier student to teach tha
>> >>>>>> >> n
>> >>>>>> >>>   one who doesn't know one doesn't know.
>> >>>>>> >>>> Iconicity is something I can hang my hat on. I see it is
>> >>>>>>related
>> >>>>>>to
>> >>>>>> pointing. What I like about pointing is that it is a gesture,
>>which
>> >>>>>>implies
>> >>>>>> movement, in the way the word is also movement. I hope I have
>>made
>> >>>>>> sufficient personal connections to your concepts without the
>>heat.
>> >>>>>>Thank
>> >>>>>> you for offering them to me.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Kind regards,
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Annalisa
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>--
>> >>>>>Carol A  Macdonald Ph D (Edin)
>> >>>>>Developmental psycholinguist
>> >>>>>Academic, Researcher,  and Editor
>> >>>>>Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with an
>object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.