[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [xmca] Where is thinking
Dear all, Karin Quast had problems with posting:
Em 19/04/2009 11:52, mktostes < mktostes@uol.com.br > escreveu:
Hope this one does not appear blanck as other messages of mine in the past.
I have found 'L. Gumplowicz' or even L. von Gumplowicz on google.
seems interesting!
Karin Quast
> Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 12:52:52 -0700
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Where is thinking - con't from Tony
> From: lchcmike@gmail.com
> To: vygotsky@unm.edu
> CC: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>
> Where is the dichotomy, Vera? Its and/both, heterochronously and
> heterogeneously, relationally and non-linearly.
> So we murder to dissect, routinely.
> (Which constantly gives us more than enough to chat about!)mike
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Vera Steiner <vygotsky@unm.edu> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > I keep on thinking that we,too, fall into a dichotomy when we reject the
> > inside/outside dynamic process. These are at time simultaneous actions:
> > appropriation, transformation, externalization and their impact on the
> > speech
> > community, while they are also part of the process of brain/neuronal
> > changes.
> > When I remember one of the messages from the xmca community, I engage in an
> > act that requires neuronal activity and while I am reformulating,
> > communicating with the source of my thinking activity, this community, I
> > co-participate in the sustained thinking activities of others. By viewing
> > these activities as either/or we are shaped by our opponents' Cartesian
> > beliefs and terminology. I cannot write these words without the words of
> > others, but I am also moving my fingers--there is no space for other fingers
> > on the keyboard. We are profoundly, irrevocably interdependent. We need a
> > new set of terms to express the consequences of that interdependence when it
> > comes to psychological processes which have not a single but distributed
> > locations,
> > Vera
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Cole" <lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2009 10:23 AM
> > Subject: [xmca] Where is thinking - con't from Tony
> >
> >
> > To shorten the string of trailing messages and focus on just one of the
> >> interesting responses:
> >>
> >> From: Tony Whitson <twhitson@udel.edu>
> >> Date: Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 5:44 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [xmca] Where is thinking?
> >> To: mcole@weber.ucsd.edu, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >>
> >>
> >> For what it's worth:
> >>
> >> Thought is what it is only by virtue of its addressing a future thought
> >> which is in its value as thought identical with it, though more developed.
> >> In this way, the existence of thought now depends on what is to be
> >> hereafter; so that it has only a potential existence, dependent on the
> >> future thought of the community.
> >>
> >> No present actual thought (which is [in itself] a mere feeling) has any
> >> meaning, any intellectual value; for this lies not in what is actually
> >> thought, but in what this thought may be connected with in representation
> >> by
> >> subsequent thoughts, so that the meaning of a thought is altogether
> >> something virtual.
> >>
> >> Accordingly, just as we say that a body is in motion, and not that motion
> >> is
> >> in a body, we ought to say that we are in thought, and not that thoughts
> >> are
> >> in us.
> >>
> >> -- Charles Peirce, Writings 2: 241,227,227
> >>
> >> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Reading this puts me strongly in mind of the epigram of the chapter 7 of
> >> Thinking and Speech, "I forgot the word I wanted to say, and thought,
> >> unembodied, returned to the hall of shadows."
> >>
> >> Locally a couple of us have been re-re-re-visiting this idea and what
> >> seems
> >> to us an incompleteness that is picked up by Pierce and which relates to
> >> the
> >> relationship between
> >> imagining and creating as well as sense and meaning. For LSV the
> >> externalized thought-in-word completes the thought, providing the "most
> >> stable zone of sense." But we were focused
> >> on the hearer of the utterance and how it was then interpreted and
> >> subsequently given further life or not as very important..... the later
> >> history of what Vygotsky called the embodied thought.
> >>
> >> I fear the invitations to confusion in all the inside/outside invocations
> >> in
> >> what we are quoting and composing.
> >>
> >> mike
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> xmca mailing list
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
_________________________________________________________________
Descubra seu lado desconhecido com o novo Windows Live!
http://www.windowslive.com.br_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca