RE: objects are material?

From: Jim Rogers (fajimr@cc.usu.edu)
Date: Sat Oct 26 2002 - 19:34:35 PDT


Mike,

below is the link to the virtual article which you can print so that you
can bring a material copy on your trip... safe journey jim

The Gordon Wells article on dialogue and activity is now available free
from Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
 
You will find it at:

http://www.erlbaum.com/Journals/journals/MCA/mca.htm

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Cole [mailto:mcole@weber.ucsd.edu]
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 8:30 PM
To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
Subject: objects are material?

Hi All-- When I try to get to Gordon's paper online, I cannot find it.
The
route to access is a myster to me.

So is the following statement in Gordon's abstract:

 Activity theory as formulated by Leont'ev and expanded by Engestrvm has
tended to emphasize activity systems in which the objects to which
subjects' actions are directed are material in form.

First of all, I do not understand the material/(ideal?) division in
Yrjo's
work. I thought he followed Ilyenkov in arguing the
interpenetration/perhaps
fusion of ideal and material. Second, Yrjo's own empirical work
emphasizes
motives/activities as "beyond the horizon" and very often as new systems
of
coordination where dialogue and polylog are central.

So, with the advantage of being about to flee to Gordon's natal country
where
the sun is promised not to shine for the duration of my trip, I would
like
to ask a couple of questions.

1) Where in Engestrom's writing is the material/ideal split so clear?
2) Where in anyone's experinece is there discourse sans materiality?
3) How the hell does one get to the article through xmca!

(signed)
About to head over the horizon perpetual student
mc



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 01:00:07 PST