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

[Xmca-l] Noumenal and Phenomenal

"Noumenal and Phenomenal worlds" sounds thoroughly, even paradigmatically, Kantian and Dualist to me, too, James and quite alien to both Vygotsky and Peirce. Please explain.


Andy Blunden
On 21/06/2016 8:11 AM, Martin John Packer wrote:
Well, you introduced it, James. You've confused me!

On Jun 20, 2016, at 1:57 PM, Ma, James (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk) <james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk> wrote:

Martin, I'm not at all being dualistic here - perhaps you thought I borrowed the Kantian distinction? James

From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
Sent: 20 June 2016 17:50
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died

But James!  That’s a fundamental dualism that Vygotsky (following Marx and Hegel) would certainly have disavowed. And Peirce too, as I understand him, at least from reading interpreters such as Paul Kockelman.


On Jun 20, 2016, at 11:02 AM, Ma, James (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk) <james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk> wrote:

Hello Larry, I haven't forgotten your early question re free will - sorry about my delayed response.

OK, first, let's make it clear that we're here talking about the phenomenal world, rather than the noumenal world. According to Kant, a distinction has to be made between the two. We have access to the former because it is a thing as it appears (knowable through our sense perception), whereas the latter we don't have access to as it is a thing in itself (beyond our capacity of knowing). Free will concerns what it takes to be in terms of one's deliberation of action. Back to what I said earlier, perception is selective, situated in virtue of free will. A large part of our decision making takes place at a preconscious, subconscious or unconscious level. It seems to me that Peirce's interpretant (a further sign - in his words, "sign in the mind") plays an important part in the deliberating of our action. More to the point, Peirce's iconicity can help us understand how the psychic imagery sets in motion an inward dialogic process within ourselves. I'm still thinking about this
  , thanks to Larry's prompt, meanwhile contemplating Peirce's idea that "all thinking is dialogic in form. Your self of one instant appeals to your deeper self for his assent".


From: Lplarry <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: 20 June 2016 16:00
To: Ma, James (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk); eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died

I hope to keep these opinions travelling as I try to see through my  vagueness towards greater clarity.

James, I am returning to your article (The Synergy of Peirce and Vygotsky as an Analytical Approach to the Multimodality of Semiotic Mediation).

A few key points you offered:

•        Peirce and Vygotsky share an ontological resonance.

•        The synergy occurs within the logical *fusion* of Vygotskian deduction and Peircean abduction.

•        This logical fusion is *designated* to authorize this synergy.

•        How this synergy is exemplified is through word-image complementarity in a storybook

•        The article accentuates the con/fluence of Peirce-Vygotsky to articulate a profound account of semiotic mediation.

•        Resonance, fusion, confluence, synergy,  share a certain connotation of unity (contrasting with union of two separate substances that join but remain two).

I hope others read this fascinating article through the prism of what David calls the invisible becoming visible and the 3rd space, the interval or transitional space as the via media through which the invisible travels on its path to becoming visible. It may contribute to scaffolding amd the ZPD as evolving concepts in transition to becoming clearer.

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Ma, James (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk)<mailto:james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk>
Sent: June 20, 2016 4:02 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity<mailto:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died

Thank you for the comments, David.

But I'm afraid, concerning Peircean abduction, you miss the point. Like induction, abduction is an inconclusive logic, i.e. the conclusion is not guaranteed. All abduction necessarily involves inferences to the best explanation but there is no final conclusion to abide by.

With regard to the Barthesian inversion of Saussure's categorisation of linguistics as part of semiotics, you again miss the point. You are right that any linguistics meaning is essentially semiotic. As Barthes put it, “to perceive what a substance signifies is inevitably to fall back in the individuation of language: there is no meaning which is not designated, and the world of signifieds is none other than that of language”. But be warned that his definition of language is in its most productive sense, embracing the entirety of semiotic entities - this extends Saussurean linguistics. You would probably find an echo in Lacan's account of the unconscious structured as a language. In my opinion, these assertions are illuminating - in contrast with being "outlandish layers of meaning to perfectly normal, commonsense insights".

Anyway, I'm glad the XMCA discussion has spawned opinionated thoughts from opinionated people (so long as they are not emotionalists)!



From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>

Sent: 17 June 2016 11:34

To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity

Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died


I think that Vygotsky's zone of proximal development can be seen as

involving the transitional zone between the visible and the invisible, as

you say. But the zone involves a transition from the invisible to the

visible. Take for example a class I observed this week. Some Korean sixth

graders are learning the ability to read fluently, by skipping over large

blocks of text, perhaps only noticing the initial and final letter, forming

a testable hypothesis about the letters in between, comparing with leading

and following context and moving on where this is adequate. The teacher

teaches this by giving an impossible task--the kids have to read a long

text about playing music to vegetables--five or six pages long. They then

stand up, one by one, and are given random passages with the sections

blanked out.They have to read the passages aloud and fill in the missing

blocks of text as best they can. When they fail, the teacher rings a bell

and they must sit down, having lost points for their whole team. The kids

are allowed to help each other (making hypotheses visible) but they are not

allowed to check the book (what's in the book stays in the book). It is

really the SAME reasoning as the functional method of dual stimulation, but

reversed. The functional method of dual stimulation allows the child to

INTERNALIZE the meaning making process by transferring it first from

interpersonal modes of mediation (instructor led) to extramental modes

(using signs) to "vraschevanie", or intro-volution. With the zone of

proximal development, we are EXTERNALIZING it; we are making still immature

functions visible by offering mediation, and with the functional method of

dual stimulation we are making visible functions invisible.

I can't understand the difference between "best explanation" and "final

solution". It seems a distinction without a difference to me, like the

difference between voting for Donald Trump and supporting him.

I can't agree with the Barthesian inversion of Saussure's location of

linguistics as part of semiotics. Semiotics and linguistics both deal with

meaning. But semiotics includes types of meaning which are not linguistic.

Can you think of any linguistic meaning which is not semiotic? I can't.

David Kellogg

Macquarie University

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 3:27 AM, Ma, James (james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk) <

james.ma@canterbury.ac.uk> wrote:

There are at least three points I’d like to make regarding the concept of
First, scaffolding is an act of semiotic mediation. To some extent it
resembles Ruqaiya Hasan’s “visible mediation” – which is deliberate and of
which interactants are aware. James Wertsch coined the term “explicit
mediation”, in which stimuli involved are not only intentional and overt
but also non-transitory. However, the very essence of scaffolding is to
reduce and eventually diminish itself when a novice has achieved what is
expected of him, although it may reappear depending on the needs of the
novice. For me, this is where scaffolding differs from Vygotsky’s ZPD (of
course ZPD is used in more of a didactic, instructive context).
Second, through the prism of Peircean abduction, scaffolding can be seen
as involving inference to best explanations – which means the more
experienced social partner trying to work out how best to assist the
novice. Possible effective solutions are best in themselves but there is no
point in finding out a final solution – as Umberto Eco would say this is
“unlimited semiosis”, which means semiosis perpetuates itself in the
realisation of meaning potentials. If I were to theorise scaffolding based
on Peircean iconicity, scaffolding is imbued with iconic signs in all
semiotic forms – verbal, non-verbal, visual, gestural and auditory etc.
Third, Roland Barthes in his “Elements of Semiology” (1967) inverted the
Saussurean classification of linguistics as part of semiotics. To me, the
Barthesian rearrangement of semiotics as part of linguistics offers a tour
d’horizon of the multimodality of communication and representation in
modern times. Language is thus in its most productive sense, encompassing
the entirety of semiotic resources – and this can, arguably, assist in
extending disciplinary boundaries and hence augment semiotic construction.
In the meantime, the word-forming potential of other modalities enriches
language as a linguistic modality because other modalities can all be cast
into words. For me, this is a dynamic two-way exchange (between linguistics
and semiotics) that deserves considered attention, if we are to further
explore scaffolding within the CHAT research paradigm.
James Ma PhD MA BSc FHEA
James Ma | Canterbury Christ Church University - Academia.edu<https://canterbury.academia.edu/JamesMa>


James Ma, Canterbury Christ Church University, Faculty of education, Faculty Member. Studies Cultural Historical Activity Theory, Sociolinguisitcs, and A Priori Knowledge. James Ma is a linguist. He received his PhD from the University of Bristol and

Ma, J. (2016). Semiotising the student perception of learning outcomes in
British higher education. Social Semiotics. Taylor & Francis.
Ma, J. (forthcoming, March 2017). “Good packaging can be misleading”: A
semiotic analysis of intersubjectivity as theory of mind between mother and
child during shared reading. British Journal of Educational Psychology.
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of Lplarry <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: 11 June 2016 16:06
To: Kindred, Jessica Dr.; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
I have watched the video of Bruner describing the arc of his personal
development and noticed the centrality of the way hypothesis channel our
actions in the actual world. Bruner hypothesizes two dominate ways of
knowing (science and narrative) both of which generate hypothesis.
Holding the reality that our hypothesis can both constrain and afford
human actions I want to mention James Ma’s exploration of Peirce’s notion
of *abduction* to elaborate Bruner’s relation between hypothesis and
In James’s article in Mind, Culture, and Activity: (2014) vlome 21:4
(374-389) exploring the synergy of Peirce and Vygotsky he explores the
concept of abduction as central to hypothesis *generating* constraints and
affordances. (see page 380).
Here is a summary.
Abduction is “the process of forming an explanatory hypothesis”.
The interpretation of signs (which is sign action) IS a *generative
process* resulting in sparking (meaning potentials) through semiotic action.
That is, the abductive process of hypothesis formation (cognition)
PROVides *space* for continuous representation of an object ( a Peircean
object is the formation of *true meaning*).
James hears echos of Baldwin’s *genetic logic* within this exploration of
hypothesis generation (abduction) as the process of sparking meaning
*potentials* that *awaken* or *emerge* into actuality.
The other Peircean notion of *vagueness* or being *opaque* seems to be
implied in abduction.
For example Bruner’s notion of (scaffolding) when intuitively generated is
a vague, opaque hypothesis *travelling* toward becoming a clarified *true
meaning* (an object) which for Peirce was a continuous process of
generating (meaning potential) which enters actuality.
I read in this notion of abduction a central theme in Bruner’s video
podcast, and wanted to spark a dialogue with James Ma’s project to travel
towards *multimodal* cognition.
In particular word-image complimentarity.
James references Valsiner and Rosa with respect to the role of language in
cognition. They pointed out a contemporary *tendency of dependence* on
language as “the only way of dealing with *meaning and sense*
James is calling us to go deeper into multimodal processes that includes
language as a mode but extending this mode to include multimodal semiosis.
This article sparks deep reflection on the centrality of meaning
*potential* as continuously generated.
Sent from my Windows 10 phone
From: Kindred, Jessica Dr.
Sent: June 11, 2016 6:42 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
Glad I asked. I guess I see it's value as a corrective to the idea of
teaching as delivery.
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu]
on behalf of David Kellogg [dkellogg60@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 7:48 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
It's possible to interpret Professor Bruner's email as hubris on several
a) It assumes that he was the first to use this metaphor. It's not clear to
me that this is the case--a number of people used it and Peter Langford and
Renee van der Veer have included Vygotsky in this number, although I have
not seen evidence of this at all.
b) It assumes that it was a good label for the phenomenon he is describing.
This is not clear to me either, as it is a mechanical one, and suggests
that knowledge is something entirely external to the child or worse that
the child himself is the work in progress.
c) It suggests that Bruner is a prophet to whom accurate, correct,
influential "intuitions" come out of the blue, his hand made strong by the
hand of the Almighty. This slights a lot of the painstaking work that
Bruner did; like Mike he came out of a rigorously behaviorist training,
which like Mike he had to transcend rather than simply (like most of us)
disdain without first mastering (I remember an early work of Bruner's in
which he defined development as "the lengthening of the distance between
the stimulus and the response").
As I said, I don't interpret Professor Bruner's email in that way. Like
Rob, I found it helpful, but mostly because it emphasized the random,
aleatory, and not very well thought out quality of the metaphor.
I think where we really disagree is on the nature of that metaphor--I don't
agree at all that it has been a useful tool for thinking about learning,
much less about development, and it has been a very blunt instrument for
thinking about the zone of proximal development.
I made the point before that Vygotsky measures the ZPD in years, but nobody
else does. One important reason that nobody else does is that people have
assimilated the ZPD to scaffolding, which is manifestly (in Bruner, Woods
and Ross and also in Acts of Meaning) about an instantaneous assimilation
of a ready made solution.
Over the last few weeks I have been translating the lecture on the Crisis
at Three from Vygotsky's lectures on pedology. Now, if you read the
material in Volume Five of the English Collected Works of LSV, you will be
very disappointed. Vygotsky begins the lecture with the statement that he
is going to examine the crisis from three points of view: neoformation,
line of development, and zone of proximal development. Then he says that
before he does any of these things, he wants to examine a good deal of
factual material (this is a typical move for Vygotsky--he never wants to
impose his categories on the material and instead prefers to allow them to
emerge from it, having given us some advance word of what to expect). The
editors of the Collected Works claim that the "factual material" is taken
from Elsa Kohler (one of the great unsung heroes of child development and
also gay rights, who lived openly with her lover in Nazi occupied Vienna).
On the face of it, though, it's just the "Seven Stars"--a folk theory in
Russia which corresponds to our folk theory of "terrible twos" and
"threenagers". And then the material ends, without any further mention of
the neoformation, the line of development or the ZPD.
Without Galina Korotaeva, this would be the end of the story. But
Korotaeva's edition of the "Lektsii' po pedologii" has a lecture "The
Crisis at Three and the Crisis at Seven" which for all the world appears to
take up precisely where the material in the Collected Works left off
(Vygotsky begins by referring back to the "Seven Stars" and noting the
unkept promise!). In fact, this appearance is misleading: the lecture in
Korotaeva's edition dates from a year BEFORE the material in the CW. But it
seems very likely that Vygotsky gave this course ("Foundations of
Pedology") more than once in the last two years of his life, and so I think
we can nevertheless read this as an early version of the continuation of
the CW material. Here Vygotsky really does talk about the neoformation
("hypobulia"), discuss lines of development (tantrums where the child
appears to act contrary to his own wishes, refusing to do things he
actually wants to do, and insisting on doing things that he doesn't really
care about or even dislikes). Then LSV says:
???????? ???????? ?? ????????? ??????: ??? ?? ?????? ??? ????????? ???????
?????????????? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ????????? ??????? ???????????
????????? ?? ?????????????? ?????????, ??????? ??????????? ? ???, ???
??????? ?????? ??? ????????? ?????? ??????? ????? ????????????, ???????? ??
????? ??????????? ??????? ? ?????????? ?????? ??????? ??????????? ????????.
????? ??????, ?????????? ?????????????? ???????, ????? ????????????
??????????? 3-??????? ??????? ???????? ??????????????? ???? ?? ???????.
"What remains is to reply to the last question: What does this hypobulic
behavior of the child offer, and what does it prefigure for the volitional
behavior of the child in preschool age? The contradictory position that
affects the child offers this different relative motive for his own
behavior, divorced from his own inclinations and facutally acting contrary
to his inclinations. In a word, what transpires is a paradoxical phenomenon
where the essential content of the crisis at three consists in the
differentiation of will from affect."
What is the last question? I think it's the question he asks at the very
beginning of the material in the CW--what is the zone of proximal
development for the Crisis at Three? And here the answer is most clear:
it's the NEXT zone of development, that is, the actual zone of development
for the preschool years (ages 3-7), i.e. it's not and never has been
David Kellogg
Macquarie University
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Kindred, Jessica Dr. <jkindred@cnr.edu>
I am unclear about how the idea of hubris has come into this. Humility,
okay. Metaphor, clearly. Temporary, yes, as in the literal meaning of
scaffolding, so too its metaphorical extension. But enduring, clearly,
as a tool for thinking about learning.
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu]
on behalf of David Kellogg [dkellogg60@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 6:08 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
I think one of the few advantages of being dead is that a critical
evaluation of one's work as a complete narrative product then becomes
possible. This is why I think the idea of a memorial issue for Jerome
Bruner makes such great critical sense (and it's also why a memorial
for Ruqaiya Hasan, the anniversary of whose death is in two weeks time,
makes sense). Bruner would have welcomed that, not in hubris but in
I have a rather different interpretation of the email that Rob Lake
circulated: I thought it was a good example of Bruner's humility, not his
hubris. "Scaffolding" was a highly influential metaphor--but I think that
by saying that it was just a labeling intuition out of the blue Bruner
emphasizing that it was a metaphor. Metaphors are misleading: they tell
a good deal about the relationship between forces but they tell us
about the nature of the force itself. So for example the "scaffolding"
Bruner wanted to emphasize was temporary: it was something to be taken
down. But in th einterpretation of "scaffolding" it has become
and a permanent fixture of interaction. Worse, it has become identified
with the ZPD, which it resembles not at all.
I would say the same thing about his ideas of narrative. Bruner was prone
to wild enthusiasms, and his enthusiasm for narrative as the very source
self is one of these. Yes, I suppose the life of Bruner is now a
But from his point of view ,the really interesting part is what happened
before it became one.
David Kellogg
Macquarie University
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Bella Kotik-Friedgut <
I am now in Portugal at EVC 4 Vygotsky conference. I shared with the
audience my memories of J.Bruner's visit to Moscow. It was more than
obituary: I wanted in a way celebrate his beautiful life full with
discoveries and a lot of personal light he transmitted to people on his
way. When Alexander Romanowich asked me to stay in Moskow ( I just
my theses ans had to go to Rostov university for my first job) he said
you will not regret" I think I was blessed with this opportunity and
enjoyed to be his  guide and secretary for this week. Let his memory be
On Thursday, June 9, 2016, Lplarry <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
This testament to how you have been deeply moved by Robert’s question
Bruner’s answer gesturing to how the concept *scaffolding* was
a labelling intuition opens up a field of *depth* inquiry asking
these intuitions *arise* or *awaken* from as they enter into history
For example, is there a living *presence* that is at this moment
through us within the *person* of Jerome Bruner? This is a notion of
*person* that has a continuing *existence* tingbeyond Bruner’s
death. This is also a labelling intuition.
Could this living *presence* (imaged as person) be a source of
*intuitions* that arise or awaken within our own sense of living
Is this *presence* that generates *intuitions* located internally or
this presence located externally, or is there a location where
arise or awaken in a third location that is permeable to both
external presence?
Others will  offer different images and words to locate where
originate. Is the image of labelling intuitions as  *seeds* forming
The term *scaffolding* that is generating *deep* dialogue within our
questions and answers within particular communities which some call
*learning* communities.
In this thread James Ma shared a link to his article that I have
downloaded from academia.edu. in which he proposes a deep sense that
*learning* generates what is *worthwhile* as advocated by the living
presence of the Confucian Classics. In particular learning that is
worthwhile develops “culture, conduct, conscientiousness, and good
The living presence of this ideal has *inspired* devotees and
throughout history to pursue truth (about) *learning* which James
aligns with intellectualism.
James describes intellectualism as being *for* the virtues and ideals
guide human participation in civilization.
I would add that this intellectual guidance often arises or awakens
through intuitions in the form of *guises* (living presences) as
Jerome Bruner in his life and in his death continues to exist within
living presence *who* exemplifies learning and intellectualism that
our own learning and intellectual virtues and ideals.
Bruner would label this a hypothesis.
Sent from my Windows 10 phone
From: Kindred, Jessica Dr.
Sent: June 8, 2016 8:30 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
Robert, I have read this email exchange that you had with "jb" over
over and find myself so moved by the idea of scaffolding as "just one
those 'labeling intuitions' that came out of the blue". This very
and sense of how ideas emerge is so important as we think about
and culture and how they influence each other in such profound and
spiralling ways. I love this and I thank you for sharing it. What a
wonderful contribution to the biography of an idea that has so
us all. I recently read a 1981 paper that Bruner wrote about
which he used the word mindfulness in such an in-passing way that I
wonder naively if his use of it as a labelling intuition then might
account for its huge status in the cultural landscape of education
in any case, great thanks for sharing.
And yes, Leif, it is wonderful to remember his keynote at Iscrat 98
Thanks to him and to all of you for sharing your actual minds toward
possible worlds.
Jessie Kindred
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;> [
xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>] on behalf of Helena
Worthen [helenaworthen@gmail.com <javascript:;>]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2016 6:23 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
Nice, Robert!!!
On Jun 6, 2016, at 11:05 AM, Robert Lake <
<javascript:;>> wrote:
*Hi Everyone,**Below is a record of my email correspondence**
Bruner w*
*hile I **was writing **an introductory book for educators about
and a second  email about the coining of the phrase "scaffolding" *
* starts from the bottom up.*
*Robert Lake*
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jerome S Bruner <jsb3@nyu.edu <javascript:;>>
Date: Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: Sketch about how you were introduced to Vygotsky
To: Robert Lake <boblake@georgiasouthern.edu <javascript:;>>
Just one of those "labelling inuitions" that came out of the blue!
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Lake <boblake@georgiasouthern.edu <javascript:;>>
Date: Saturday, October 2, 2010 4:17 pm
Subject: Re: Sketch about how you were introduced to Vygotsky
To: jsb3@nyu.edu <javascript:;>
Thank-you Dr. Bruner.
It really does help.
When did you first come up with the notion of scaffolding? Was it
connected to an observation out of your own experience in research
a personal experience?
Thanks again for responding. You made my day.
Robert Lake
Jerome S Bruner  10/02/10 4:04 PM >>>
As I recall, my introduction to Vygotsky came when Eugenia
was working on a translation of what was to be Vygotsky's first
in English, THOUGHT AND LANGUAGE, published in 1962 by MIT Press.
You'll recall that I wrote an Introduction to that book.  I had
earlier become acquainted with Vygotsky's work through Alexander
Romanovich Luria who was the Professor of Psychology at  Moscow
whom I visited in Moscow on several occasions.  He was a great
of Vygotsky and his work and felt strongly that my own work on
perception and cognition generally were very much in the
mode.  For my part, I felt in those days that Vygotsky was an
important corrective to the Piagetian culturally-blind approach to
child development.  I think that it was that aspect of my own work
that led to my being asked to write an introduction to the
Does that help?
All best wishes.
      Jerome Bruner
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Lake
Date: Friday, October 1, 2010 2:40 pm
Subject: Sketch about how you were introduced to Vygotsky
To: jerome.bruner@nyu.edu <javascript:;>
Cc: carol.feldman@nyu.edu <javascript:;>
Dear Dr. Bruner,
I  am now beginning chapter one of a primer on Vygotsky and
education. Actually I already signed a book contract. One of the
I am covering is a brief introduction to some of LSV's academic
"family". I have sources for M. Cole, S. Scribner, A. Kozulin, L.
Holtzman, J.Wersch, E. Kravtsova, Y. Engstrom ,D.Robbins and L.
but  I am not able to find anything in the way of  historical
biography about your connection to his work. Is  there anything
written anywhere about how you were introduced to your Vygotsky?
If not, may I call you and ask a few questions?
Thank-you for all you have imparted to our generation.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Helena Worthen <
Andy, thank you for finding this!!!
On Jun 5, 2016, at 8:56 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
<javascript:;>> wrote:
Jerome Bruner and Oliver Sachs on Luria, interviewed by Mike Cole<
Thanks to the Alexander Luria Archive at http://luria.ucsd.edu where
there is a better copy of this movie.
Andy Blunden
On 6/06/2016 10:38 AM, David H Kirshner wrote:
My condolences, Mike.
A huge loss to all of us.
Perhaps sometime you can share with us some of your personal
experiences with him.
-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;> [mailto:
xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>] On Behalf Of mike
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2016 6:37 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Sad news-- Jerry Bruner has died
At the age of 100 it cannot be unexpected, but  I have just
a colleague that Jerry Bruner has died.
Its difficult to lose a colleague and friend who had a
influence on my own life trajectory.
Robert Lake  Ed.D.
Associate Professor
Social Foundations of Education
Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading
Georgia Southern University
P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA  30460
Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group
Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy
born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John
and Education*,1916, p. 139
Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut