Re: Keeping it simple for now

From: Paul H.Dillon (illonph@pacbell.net)
Date: Sat Oct 28 2000 - 07:03:01 PDT


I want to also apologize for my low level of participation (perhaps this is
a breath of fresh air for some :-) ) but I've a conference next week and
have been preparing three presentations for that and it has kept me totally
busy from before dawn's rosy fingers . . . actually it's raining and dawn's
fingers are more like leaden grey mittens, but . . .

I second Andy's appreciation for the contributions to the list . . . I am
hoping to catch up and participate more fuly after next weekend. Meanwhile
I am reading all the contributions and even making notes but jeez, one'd
have to write a lengthy article to comment fully .

Thanks to all those who've taken this reading seriously.

Paul H. Dillon

----- Original Message -----
From: Andy Blunden <andy@mira.net>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 6:33 AM
Subject: Re: Keeping it simple for now

> pressures of work, the intensity of xmca chat and the effort it takes an
> amateur like me to keep up, leaves me reading the list over the weekend in
> order to to be able to absorb and reflect!! apologies! but wow! it is a
> stunning experience being part of this list! i am firmly convinced that
> activity theory has a crucial role to play in resolving the crisis we are
> facing, but ... I am also dissatisfied in many ways ....
> ______________________________
> Diane on - "the actual objective world always strikes me as kind of a red
> herring - sure, it's there, but we can't know it"
>
> what do you mean that "we can't know it?". what is this knowing? is it
> something other than our activity which succeeds as well as it does in
> reproducing ourselves? does the fact that we can't produce an identical
> image of it in our heads mean "we can't know it?" surely not!! because
> knowing is not reflecting in that camera sense, is it? our knowing it is
> the adequacy of our social activity in it.
>
> and to by-pass this fact has some significance. if we accept that the
> objective world exists, we can assume all of us share the same one,
> otherwise the terms "objective" and "world" are being mis-used.
>
> the criterion of truth is therefore how we live. if you take away the
> category of "objective world", you can choose your own truth. some people
> do believe that individuals freely construct personal meaning for
> themselves, ... but I don't think that's viable at all, do you?
>
> Andy
>
> At 08:30 AM 27/10/2000 -0600, you wrote:
> >hworthen@igc.org writes:
> >>There is the "objective" actual world.
> >
> >ok, i admit i've been out of this conversation for some time, too weary
to
> >pontificate or show off what i know, because, hey, what do i know?
> >but the actual objective world always strikes me as kind of a red herring
> >- sure, it's there,
> >but we can't know it, so - isn't that a bit like hypothesizing a "real"
> >world
> >while admitting there is no way to access it?
> >it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but in terms of materialism, and
> >perception and perspective
> >and that ever-haunting historicized body creeping itself all over
> >everything we think we might
> >know, or believe,
> >i am not sure i see the value in believing in an "objective" world,
> >because it assumes
> >the "world" holds some sort of perspective, or position, that
> >exceeds our (people) interactions with it - ?
> >isn't objectivity a value-position?
> >diane
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > **********************************************************************
> > :point where everything listens.
> >and i slow down, learning how to
> >enter - implicate and unspoken (still) heart-of-the-world.
> >
> >(Daphne Marlatt, "Coming to you")
> >***********************************************************************
> >
> >diane celia hodges
> >
> > university of british columbia, centre for the study of curriculum and
> >instruction
> >==================== ==================== =======================
> > university of colorado, denver, school of education
> >
> >Diane_Hodges@ceo.cudenver.edu
> >
> >
> >
> >
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | - Andy Blunden - Home Page - http://home.mira.net/~andy/index.htm - |
> | All mysteries which lead theory to mysticism find their rational |
> | solution in human practice and in the comprehension of this practice.|
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 01 2000 - 01:01:36 PST