Thanks Ana and Mike. I suppose I have a much narrower context of application
for the word "history" and that is leading me astray, just as the word
community did last summer when we were discussing LBE. In LBE (if I have it
right), community refers to the entire activity system, not (or not only) to
the node labeled as such in Yrjo triangles. Likewise, history is both a meta
category (everything has a time scale) and a specific reference to the
"genetic domains". Words are such troublesome things. I wonder why we
bother!
djc
-----Original Message-----
From: Ana Marjanovic Shane [mailto:anashane@speakeasy.net]
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 10:29 PM
To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
Subject: Re: History
I think you are right!! Each of the elements incorporates a different scale
a different sense of history. I think that "H" in CHAT refers to all of
them - to the sense that whatever you are talking about you should take the
history of that element into account. Sometimes it may also mean that you
have to find the relationship between two different scales.
This is a very important issue. Jay Lemke wrote about it on XMCA if I
remember well several years ago.
Ana
At 06:39 PM 2/11/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Could I ask a dumb question that may or may not be relevant to the current
>discussion. To what does the HISTORY in CHAT refer? Cultural history? The
>history of the individual (development?)? The trajectory of the activity?
If
>we lay YE's model out, each of the elements seem to have a history
>(artifact, community, division of labor, etc.) but a slightly different
>sense of history for each. Or am I playing the role of Mr. H. Dumpty
>again.............djc
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 01:00:19 PST