Re: [xmca] Copernicus, Darwin and Bohr

From: Jay Lemke <jaylemke who-is-at>
Date: Sat Jun 30 2007 - 17:27:14 PDT

More likely, the analogy with Latour's position is that artifacts are
more like people than we imagined before, though actually I think the
point is that people are not people without their artifacts (and vice
versa in some sense).

So what kinds of artifacts make us what kinds of people? and what
kinds of artifact-mediated literacies will make people in the future
the kinds of people they want to be? perhaps not the same kinds of
literacies that made the kinds of people there were in the past ...
but the choice ought to belong to those who will be these people in
the future, and I'm for supporting some new ways of being human.


At 12:26 PM 6/26/2007, you wrote:
>Some quick thoughts...
>The "premise that persons and artifacts are equivalent actants" might be
>viewed as the triumph of scientistic, materialist reductionism, no? People
>are just soft machines, after all. And the insistence that "there is no
>thinking without tools" is a wonderful limitation of thinking to no more
>instrumental calculation.
>And what better way to ensure that people really are no more than soft
>machines, extensions of technology, than to deny them access to the
>literacies that, one might argue, offer the possibility for freedom, for a
>different kind of thinking that steps out of "the system," at least for a
>What do you think? Do you think?
> Martin
>xmca mailing list

Jay Lemke
University of Michigan
School of Education
610 East University
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Tel. 734-763-9276
Website. <>
xmca mailing list
Received on Sat Jun 30 17:30 PDT 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jul 02 2007 - 07:31:11 PDT