RE: arievitch/leontiev

From: Mike Cole (
Date: Fri Aug 06 2004 - 13:48:50 PDT

Michael-- We would need to go back and recover a long thread. But the
issue being discussed is whether the organized, everyday, experience
of people is the starting point for psychological analysis or not. The
term, "everyday" can be considered problematic and ought always to be
examined. Taking SAT tests can be considered an everyday day (or twice
yearly) activity for American school children. But, for example, to
take a two-choice maze designed for rats (never mind, it was not designed
in terms of rat unwelts) as a model for conducting experiments supposed
to have generality for humans is problematic on many grounds. Ditto
a lot of other very standard methods currently in use in psychology: how
about using computer displays of fish in made up ocean ecologies to
reach conclusions about cultural styles that apply to the west and the

Or, taking school tasks to be representative of cognitive tasks in general?

Is this a topic we need to go into at length at present? Or is it a
holdover from earlier conversations that needs to be returned to? Or?

Right now I am mentally trying to transit to Rommetveit. Perhaps the issue
will reappear there?

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:43:01 PST