Well, for one thing Naoki Ueno's words that it is time to finish the
homework for ISCRAT applies to me, too.
=46or another thing I'd just love to see the face of the bank teller when yo=
u
deposit a chick...
Then, seriously but without much time I agree heartily with you, Eugene,
that precisely because the functionality of things is tangled and changing,
definitions of components of analysis aren't much help if they, too refuse
to ever stand still and have sharp outlines.
Now... staring at the screen with your list on it:
>I agree with Eva that functionally things can be very complicated and
>unclear. However, I think it can be time to give "purified" definitions (i=
n
>what is functionally body, what is functionally object,
>what is functionally tool, what is functionally media, and what is
>functionally co-subject (i.e., partner, co-agency)?
=2E.. I find myself groping for firm ground on both the side of theory and
the side of practice. And I don't find it within my reach this evening on
either side. All I can say is that which items I'd put on the list would
depend both on what difficult/ /interesting reality I was confronting AND
which version of theoretical systems that appeared most constructive/
/challenging in that connection.
Eva
at sea in this medium
suddenly missing an anchor