thanks Mike--promoting docility is surely a goal of the first approach.
Could you please give me the Luria cite? thanks,Peter
At 10:17 AM 5/31/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>Peter-- There is a LOT of evidence to support the claim that
>
>He argues that changes in the environment actually change how brains work;
>that brains encode representations differently in response to changes in
>the setting.
>
>Start with AR Luria and his slogan that the circuits of the brain are
>completed through the environment, and in the case of humans, that means
>the culturally organized environment.
>
>I have a new paper (somewhere!) with Jan Derry that reviews some of the
>Japanese studies on the brain bases of abacus expertise that supports this
>claim. If I can find it, I'll try to put in on my web page
>
>I think it is way past time for people to stop counterposing the social
>and the biological. It simply can't hold water except with a lot of bracketing
>and even then it is dangerous. The human "social" is BOTH the consequence of
>our phylogenetic heritage AND our cultural history which gives human sociality
>its specific nature (and some, like Savage-Rumbaugh of Kanzi fame would deny
>even that), I would not.
>
>Your analysis of the two approaches to character ed sounds right on to me.
>How about "pacification" as a name for the first approach?
>mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 12:05:49 PST