I resonate with this perspective. I think it is only possible if two or
more schemas can be "held" simultaneously.... which can only be the case
if we do not see the different schemas as "competing," meaning competing
for first place at the expense of the other (only the dominate view
"wins"). Schemas will clash/contradict each other while "living" along
side each other. Then something NEW can emerge out of "holding the
tension" (Friedman). The asymmetry of schemas allows for different schemas
to co-exist and the tension of which engenders creativity and newness.
Discoordinations seem to imply discoordinate with the "dominant" schema.
I would propose the idea of "tension" between coordinate schemas. Each
schema has its own integrity. The "tension" engenders reflection.
Something like that......
Maria Tillmanns
On Fri, 22 Feb 2002, Mike Cole wrote:
> Dewey-- I think your point about requiring the existence of two schemas
> simultaneously in order to get reflection (reflective abstraction?) seems
> right, but how does the second one get there? For that matter, where did the
> first one come from?
>
> (See, i ended my message with a ?) :-)
> mike
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 01:00:21 PST