Thanks very much, Nate, for make the Thibault article more accessible. It
was chosen as the "freebie" for the volume 7, number 4 issue of MCA for a
couple of reasons. First, it brings back to us a discussion initiated on
this list by Arne Reithel who, very early on, pointed to potential of
Gerald Edelman's ideas for linking the study of cultural-historical and
ontogenetic levels to the phylogenetic level. Second, it ties into the
work of Jay Lemke and others, including myself, who argue for the
the systems notion that in order to have "one level" of organization, analyticallly, you need at least three. This is a central point to come out of
connectionist modelling in the 1980's as well as various systems theories
of the kind that Jay has worked with.
I found the Thibault article informative in suggestion concrete ways to
realize the potential in Edelman for understanding the interweaving of
phylogenetic, c-h, and ontogenetic levels of analysis. Thibault seems, to
my at least, correct, that Edelman's approach -- against his own metatheory--
remains to close to the brain with a subsequent failure to look at the
problem of "re-entry" which is a central mechanism in the theory. In so
far as this re-entry process entails mediation by artifacts, the cultural
historical level can be seen to enter crucially into the organization of
the brain itself.... an argument made by Luria before any of us were in
diapers.
The linkages to Halliday provide another path of fruitful travel, bringing
us around to the work of Gordon Wells and others who find in Halliday a
useful complement to that Vygotsky and his students.
Now that it is available at the press of a button, what do others think?
mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 01 2001 - 01:00:50 PDT