[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: Fwd: [Методология и история психологии] Uploaded What theory is not.pdf



David --

I wouldn't be so severe as to say that you're being compulsively cynical, but I would say that your comments are a bit on the tough side.

This article (which is showing up on my subject line in Cyrillic) is one of those  code-breakers that may seem unnecessary to those for whom the information is obvious, but it essential for those who haven't run into anyone who could step aside for a moment and pass along the key secrets. It reminds me of a message sent out on XMCA about 20 years ago -- is that possible? -- by Chris Argyris about how to behave with ones colleagues on email. These are things that if no one says them out loud, they are expensive to learn through trial and error.


Helena Worthen
hworthen@illinois.edu
helenaworthen@gmail.com

On Jun 15, 2014, at 1:31 AM, David Kellogg wrote:

> Mike:
> 
> This article struck me as theoretically naive. First of all, the whole idea
> of articles without theory is a little silly, particularly for anybody who
> has taken Chapter Two of Thinking and Speech and Vygotsky's critique of
> Piaget's atheoretism on board. Secondly, the idea that "why" questions and
> a focus on causality is a hallmark of theory essentially writes off the
> whole of Dilthey, descriptivism, structuralism and post-structuralism. You
> might not agree with this line of thought and body of work, but to deny it
> status as theory seems pointless.
> 
> I must admit, though, the whole genre of editors and reviewers
> who repackage as articles their complaints about having to review articles
> by professors who are desperate to publish is rather puzzling to me. There
> are plenty of other channels for this sort of thing, e.g. reviews, pub
> discussions, and even xmca. But perhaps they too  are desperate to publish.
> Or am I being compulsively cynical?
> 
> David Kellogg
> Hankuk University of Foreign Studies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 15 June 2014 02:13, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I recommend this paper on what theory is not. It touches on a number of
>> issues that we encounter a good deal in reviewing manuscripts sent to MCA.
>> I am forwarding from
>> Ilya Garber's discussion group with thanks to Ilya for posting.
>> mike
>> 
>> 
>>  Ilya Garber posted in Методология и история психологии
>> <
>> https://www.facebook.com/n/?groups%2F505367082848886%2F776439485741643%2F&aref=354957658&medium=email&mid=a067d84G3212ac93G1528395aG96Gba24&bcode=1.1402765399.AblhaHTp27u9ny_P&n_m=lchcmike%40gmail.com
>>> 
>> [image: Ilya Garber]
>> <
>> https://www.facebook.com/n/?profile.php&id=1202221848&aref=354957658&medium=email&mid=a067d84G3212ac93G1528395aG96Gba24&bcode=1.1402765399.AblhaHTp27u9ny_P&n_m=lchcmike%40gmail.com
>>> 
>> Ilya
>> Garber
>> <
>> https://www.facebook.com/n/?profile.php&id=1202221848&aref=354957658&medium=email&mid=a067d84G3212ac93G1528395aG96Gba24&bcode=1.1402765399.AblhaHTp27u9ny_P&n_m=lchcmike%40gmail.com
>>> 
>> 10:02am
>> Jun 14
>> Практически в каждой журнальной статье по психологии есть теоретический
>> раздел. Два опытных и умных редактора объяснили, что не является теорией.
>> Must read.
>> What theory is not.pdf
>> <
>> https://www.facebook.com/download/682318241852537/What%20theory%20is%20not.pdf
>>> 
>> 
>> View Post on Facebook
>> <
>> https://www.facebook.com/n/?groups%2F505367082848886%2F776439485741643%2F&aref=354957658&medium=email&mid=a067d84G3212ac93G1528395aG96Gba24&bcode=1.1402765399.AblhaHTp27u9ny_P&n_m=lchcmike%40gmail.com
>>> 
>> · Edit Email Settings
>> <
>> https://www.facebook.com/n/?settings&tab=notifications&section=group_notification&aref=354957658&medium=email&mid=a067d84G3212ac93G1528395aG96Gba24&bcode=1.1402765399.AblhaHTp27u9ny_P&n_m=lchcmike%40gmail.com
>>> 
>> · Reply to this email to add a comment.
>>