Thanks matt that looks very helpful.
On 12/4/06, Matt Brown <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Dec 3, 2006, at 11:08 AM, Mike Cole wrote:
> > I have been puzzling again over the constructivism/constructionism
> > distinction which has resurfaced here.
> Mike's message inspired me to go looking for some resources online,
> and I found a few goodies:
> Ian Hacking also has a book where he tries to untangle some of these
> issues. It's well worth the read for anyone trying to get straight
> about constructivalationism. ;)
> The lesson I get from the book is that it is counter-productive to
> bandy about talk about "social construction" in a generalized way,
> that there are a number of related but distinct ideas that go under
> the banner of "social construction," and that one really ought to be
> clear about how certain things are and aren't socially constructed,
> rather than speak very broadly about it.
> Hacking sometimes goes to far in trying to make things come out
> neatly, but it is a good first step.
> Matt Brown (email@example.com) | "The mind and the world jointly
> Philosophy Graduate Student | make up the mind and the world."
> Univ. of California San Diego | - Hilary Putnam
> Homepage: http://thm.askee.net |
> xmca mailing list
xmca mailing list
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 03 2007 - 07:06:18 PST