I think we all have time problems, Ana, and different styles and proclivities.
As you have probably noticed, some discussions I get into a lot, some not
at all, some in between. I am a lousy typist and a lousy speller, a nice
combination in this medium where I cannot back up to one line higher without
a lot of trouble. And of course, people are welcome to read and use what
they read as they like, and to jump in when they like. When I get nervous
is when there are silences of particular parts of the group, in the most
recent case, the group that voted to discuss Arievitch, and then went
silent. To the extent that such silence comes from a feeling that one's
questions or opinions don't measure up, don't "count," its a loss to the
entire discussion group.
Re Arievitch's article and about Galperin more generally. He seemed to me
a gentle, decent person when I knew him in the early 1960's. Its always
been interesting to me that he is considered a "Vygotskian" when he did
not have a very high opinion of Vygotsky so far as I can tell. This is
discussed in the Rose and ? review of Jacques Haenen's book about
Galperin which, in my usual too hurried way, I forgot mention when
I posted the ancillary refs re Galperin a few days ago. The Haenen book
was published by Nova, 1995.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:42:57 PST