[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xmca-l] Re: Vygotsky.Peirce.Mediation
- To: Andy Blunden <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <email@example.com>
- Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Vygotsky.Peirce.Mediation
- From: mike cole <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 17:20:18 -0700
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=3N6bKVSZ7TcZeg0EC847bWwExOVSJG0wa9p22j0TmqA=; b=hVaWhY9bXei2X2E0NeeUH/aGkir+hWRZaAODvRtOWQ4TxIAAICMXiQFZcJ04XyF1bt NAIA2dx78tDfCLNhVwOUXdaLl1w7YF2Dio9K4NEFp0puFY8FuK11tybjePkxSSCH1pAn s8a2ou0fq5RKr2z5mLGfgL9Vzs84z5qT+4jrPbypp4KgaUMPCPkHBpqBLBQmxKEjHM3N MTE84Zf/nUenQxEWJoXzWCy6i0NNjREV/MKWsP4SPuCCbATNDwlClgnvWa9HwTeDB0uE ptF86aSCneMuag0+frKwKMg7nKFxJYXpGRJXwEsf8B+mI5KKw5rFqyxbh5LagBwSXoJG lsvw==
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- List-archive: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l>
- List-help: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=help>
- List-id: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l.mailman.ucsd.edu>
- List-post: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-subscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <CAHCnM0C2t1A_CBphdydpy3zHCNnoQCGS6MpRKudQAKnzrXzDpA@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <email@example.com>
- Sender: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I mis-wrote, Andy. I did not mean to say that YOU held that view, Andy.
Rather, your note about a bridge presupposing two entities raised the issue
clearly. Alfred held challenged me on this very point, insisting he was a
dualist and using Peirce as his tool of thought. In any event, the document
you forwarded has a lot of history of semiotics, Peirce, and LSV, and xmca.
And the belief among some that Vygotsky was a dualist remains. That is what
makes Peirce such an interesting 'third'.
If one googles Alfred Lang on the lchc website homepage lchc.ucsd.edu, a
list of relevant documents comes up.
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Andy Blunden <email@example.com> wrote:
> Goodness, I will really have to work harder to make my meaning clear, I
> was trying to say that in the tradition running through Hegel and Marx that
> Vygotsky was *not* a dualist.
> I'm not sure which document captures the discussion Mike was talking of
> but try this:
> Andy Blunden
> On 22/06/2016 1:54 AM, mike cole wrote:
>> The header is a three word summary of the topic that seems to have emerged
>> to engage discussion, James, so maybe use that
>> or put together a header of your own. Semiotics could be there.
>> A discussion of this topic might begin by unearthing the discussions in an
>> earlier xmca generation. Arne Raeithel and Alfred Lang
>> led discussion on this topic as has, I believe, Jay Lemke. Alfred was
>> steadfast in his interpretation of Vygotsky as a dualist in
>> precisely the way that Andy did in a recent note. Its in the newsletter
>> the archives, or perhaps in Andy's computer.
>> Given that as background, what new insights can we gain from considering
>> these early efforts at mutual enlightenment via computer *mediated*
>> Could some of the core discussers organize to point us to prior
>> understandings of this nexus of topics from the xmca/xlchc archives?
>> That would provide a starting point for assessing the answer to my
>> question. Otherwise, I fear we will be unable to supercede a collective
>> level of discourse that corresponds more or less to chaining in a
>> Vygotskian conceptual hierarchy.
>> Summer Solstice Suggestion
It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an object
that creates history. Ernst Boesch