[Xmca-l] Re: useful psychology?

Sun Jan 19 07:44:17 PST 2020

Michael,

I see when I was asleep , you had the short convincing reply from Martin. I
hope this is not a charge on them.

But to take the burden on my own shoulder I’d say on my screen I have 15
lines from you but to my perspective it seems a dozen of books not that I’m
so great a man of knowledge. Nnnnnnnnno! On every side I see the great ones.

The way it seems to me we have two basic choices about humans. Humans
either are or they become. If they are then reactions, capabilities are
innate. If they become then these reactions and capabilities are in
reaction to the ecology (stimulus unless somebody has a better concept). I
see Vygotsky falling in to the same category. This existential question is
who controls the stimulus response feedback loop.

Reply :

A. Please read “one is not born a personality” though I’m sure you have the
whole story in every respect.

B. That takes us to the idea that from individual to a person there’s a
very long way to cover.

C. This has a tight connection with the social meaning and personal sense
in Vygotsky and Leontiev.

D. We ask ourselves why man is not a stuffy entity but the ensemble of
social relations.

E. It’s not outright to have a look at Hegel’s start of Logic in regard to
this discussion.

F. To have a look at Marx’s Method of Political economy where the being of
the Social Being is pre-supposed when the idea of the ascent from the
abstract to the concrete occurs. And many more …

With the “who controls the stimulus response feedback loop” you fortunately
passed Being and entered Essence [of Man]. When man is born but stagnated ,
maximally they become the sort of the Genie creature because this likely
creature was not appropriately conditioned , deprived of a human ecology
then deprived of her contributions to the arsenal of the transformative
processes both ontologically and epistemologically as well. Man is not just
the creature who gives to the ecology and receives from the ecology. What
works is the what and how of this giving and receiving. The beginning of
this receiving we see in the Chim who in the available visual field can
handle the rods to reach the branch and in the pusher of the game who gets
raw-fully that the pushing brings him the share of the hunt. But neither
the former invented the Crane let alone the Robotic Automaton nor the
latter could think of finding the very calories in pills and capsules. For
a better concept , one could think of “human needs in their hierarchies and
orientations. End of Reply.

Two individuals can give the same response to a stimulus and that the
feedback is completely different means the ecological feedback has great
power in determining our responses. Vygotsky’s first step, it seems to me,
is to agree with Kohler. Non-humans do not have the ability to remember
responses to stimuli  which gives them limited control over their ecology.
If I give you an apple on Tuesday and you give me five dollars it is a
great advantage to know that if I give you an apple on Thursday you will
give me another five dollars. Vygotsky hypothesized a set of external
moving to internal tools for this (semiotic mediation) but I think that is
an idea he was using to explain the process but it was not basic to what he
was after.

Reply :

Yes , we have this in CHAT. The child gets the passing success by cheating
but cries painfully afterwards and there appears a search for delivery. The
intentional will might disentangle the knot. But the problem is how this
intentional will comes into being and how it develops. Is the
intentionality a matter of degrees in different ages or is it an absolute
once for all phenomenon? There or Becoming? Why does the one year old fail
the intention? There are the age crises. Not just the age crises but all
crises come out of contradictions. Any phenomenon has its time of birth ,
its middle active life , and its perishing period and time of death to give
its place to a new phenomenon which one has been concepted within the womb
of the previous one keeping the positive features discarding the negative
ones [sublation]. For this we should be familiar with the quant/qual ,
continuity/discontinuity , and necessity/chance categories.

The other one continues with his cheating to become a man of fortunes as we
see in our days. What causes the difference? Here we remember Vasilyuk’s
investigation of perezhivanie and how to regain a relief. And seeing a
population not as an initial combinations of sums , of equal partners ,
then deducing from it to reach the idea that the “Wealth of the Nation”
belongs to this integrity. The class phenomenon and concept I mean.

And then you discuss Memory as a non-monopolistically human advantage. I’m
living in a relevant situation. I wonder if you have the breaking news each
day. Incidentally , on Tuesday , I had the dollars enough for a flight
travel ticket. But on Thursday , though I had the clear recall , I had to
cancel the flight. The more I scratched the Brain , the less I found out
why the compulsion. Some intimate friend opted for a solution. The other
day he brought me Volume 3 of Capital and exhausted his energies to make me
understand what the cause was. It was nothing but the Global Money which is
the last metamorphosis in Monetary conceptual development. It’s not an
imaginary tale , friend! It’s the reality of our day to day lives. It’s the
same ecology. It’s the this World. However , ecological fluctuations as you
dub it , ruins the very lives of people. And as you love the idea of the
Becoming , I should tell you that Brains and Minds and memories are also
developing all along the ways of the World and the Conditions. Past
memories are effective but just not enough. The dog also remembers her
owner and trainer. What the tigers do in circus are not all instincts ;
otherwise the trainer in one instant would be finished with the existence.
Creativity and facing odd novelties of the complicated life affairs knows
no Memory as the simple recall for a finishing task of man’s onward
progress. Scientific analysis and synthesis of the fabrics of the actual
situations , going from the surface to the depths of the cash conflicts and
antinomies and contradictions and finding about what is underlined which
causes surface phenomena is the way to have a deep understanding of the
conflicts and how to give them an appropriate resolution.  End of Reply.

As we move to a more modern society we begin to recognize that we not only
remember how to react to different stimuli , but with the right reactions
we have the ability to control the stimulus and therefore manipulate the
stimulus response loop. In other words more power is given to the
responder. I plant wheat in a field. It does not grow. I respond by not
planting wheat anymore. But what if I ask my neighbor and he tells me he
was successful on a field on the other side of the mountain. I don’t own
any fields on the other side of the mountain but I go look at them and
figure out what they have (maybe streams running down from a mountain). So
I look for fields with a similar water supply. People who are able to use
their thinking as a tool in this way have a great advantage. Of course
there is no way this would naturally come from interacting with the
environment. You could not learn this type of control of your thinking just
through natural stimulus response patterns. But even here I don’t think
this is what Vygotsky was really after. Then what I think you find it in
his critique of Piaget. Vygotsky agrees with Piaget (really I think this
tribalism has really hurt education, thinking epistemology). His big
critique I think is why Piaget thinks the change in thinking (from concrete
to more abstract) would happen at all. People do not naturally embrace
conflict and change. It would be easiest for the farmer to just give up on
planting wheat. It would be easiest for the neighbor to not mention the
fields on the other side of the mountain (would you?). What is the
mechanism, what causes this to happen? I think this is where Vygotsky
started his search and it is where he (unfortunately much too early) ended
it.

Reply : Intelligent complex processes are not that simple. Maybe you’re
giving me concrete examples. Many thanks for that.

You have all the surface means available to you yet you don’t have good
harvests years after years. You take the seeds of the neighbor’s farm and
those of your own to a scientific laboratory. The researcher tells you why
even with the provision of water you didn’t take good results. It’s the
contamination of the hands of planters with some  microscopic tiny
particles of some powdery substance that has caused the harm. You as a
skilled farmer but lacking chemical science could not have been efficient
enough to make your efforts yield fruitful results just by visual
perspectives , with the natural eyes. Again distinguishing between sensual
perceptual cognition and true rational cognition as elucidated repeatedly.
If you read Marx , please read how the tendency of the ratio of profits to
fall while the volume of the profit tends to increase is justified by Marx
and how the capitalists succeeded temporarily to improve the situation.
Again the problem is not why beautiful effective ways of thinking provide
solutions. The first problem is why in many similar ways very beautiful
effective ways of thinking do not bring up favorable results. For the
problem of the Global Warming many intelligent powerful Minds have been and
are at work but the solution is not the near objective. Then thoughts do
not always and necessarily find their ways to appropriate actions and to a
good finish. Second , even with perfect effective productive ways of
thinking (scientific endeavors) the question of the Genetics of Thoughts is
at issue. End of Reply.

So I question whether it is right to say behaviorism is about prediction
and control and Vygotsky theory is not. Unless the theory is completely
idealistic there is going to be some element of prediction and control in
human behavior.

Reply :

As explained fully , I believe the first part is not helpful but the second
part in its entirety IS.

Dear Michael! You and Alfredo were very kind to consider my posts. I give
my sincere thanks. Maybe in the future we have time again to deal with
Vygotsky’s critique on Piaget.

Best wishes

Haydi

P.S. As I can’t keep up with the coming trailing threads , I might fail a
likely timely response. Sorry for that if any!

On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 11:40 PM Glassman, Michael <glassman.13@osu.edu>
wrote:

> Hello Haydi and Alfredo,
>
>
>
> The way it seems to me we have two basic choices about humans. Humans
> either are or they become. If they are then reactions, capabilities are
> innate. If they become then these reactions and capabilities are in
> reaction to the ecology (stimulus unless somebody has a better concept). I
> see Vygotsky falling in to the same category. This existential question is
> who controls the stimulus response feedback look. Two individuals can give
> the same response to a stimulus and that the feedback is completely
> different means the ecological feedback has great power in determining our
> responses. Vygotsky’s first step, it seems to me, is to agree with Kohler.
> Non-humans to not have the ability to remember responses to stimulus which
> gives them limited control over their ecology. If I give you an apple on
> Tuesday and you give me five dollars it is a great advantage to know that
> if I give you an apple on Thursday you will give me another five dollars.
> Vygotsky hypothesized a set of external moving to internal tools for this
> (semiotic mediation) but I think that is an idea he was using to explain
> the process but it was not basic to what he was after.
>
>
>
> As we move to a more modern society we begin to recognize that we not only
> remember how to react to different stimulus, but with the right reactions
> we have the ability to control the stimulus and therefore manipulate the
> stimulus response loop. In other words more power is given to the
> responder. I plant wheat in a field. It does not grow. I respond by not
> planting wheat anymore. But what if I ask my neighbor and he tells me he
> was successful on a field on the other side of the mountain. I don’t own
> any fields on the other side of the mountain but I go look at them and
> figure out what they have (maybe streams running down from a mountain). So
> I look for fields with a similar water supply. People who are able to use
> their thinking as a tool in this way have a great advantage. Of course
> there is no way this would naturally come from interacting with the
> environment. You could not learn this type of control of your thinking just
> through natural stimulus response patterns. But even here I don’t think
> this is what Vygotsky was really after. Then what. I think you find it in
> his critique of Piaget. Vygotsky agrees with Piaget (really I think this
> tribalism has really hurt education, thinking epistemology). His big
> critique I think is why Piaget things the change in thinking (from concrete
> to more abstract) would happen at all. People do not naturally embrace
> conflict and change. It would be easiest for the farmer to just give up on
> planting wheat. I would be easiest for the neighbor to not mention the
> fields on the other side of the mountain (would you?). What is the
> mechanism, what causes this to happen? I think this is where Vygotsky
> started his search and it is where he (unfortunately much too early) ended
> it.
>
>
>
> So I question whether it is right to say behaviorism is about prediction
> and control and Vygotsky theory is not. Unless the theory is completely
> idealistic there is going to be some element of prediction and control in
> human behavior.
>
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On
> Behalf Of *Haydi Zulfei
> *Sent:* Saturday, January 18, 2020 11:41 AM
> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: useful psychology?
>
>
>
> Andy, all,
>
>
>
> *1*Behaviorism as the science of controlling people, as the opposite of
> an emancipatory science, is exactly how I teach it in my learning theory
> courses. *2*I too find the most useful reading of Vygotsky’s attempts as
> aiming at an emancipatory science, *3*although clearly the instrumental
> bend in some of the formulations gets in the way, including the terminology
> of*4* “control” that also characterized, for example, Dewey’s ideas on
> inquiry. “The artificial control of behavior” could for example be *5*as
> well formulated as the object-oriented activity of a social movement, which
> *6*precisely aims to gain “control” over conditions for development; * 7*only
> that “control” might be a quite misleading way of posing it…
>
>
>
> Alfredo,
>
> This is what I replied to. Sorry I pressed the wrong button to reply
> therefore you’re in doubt which of your posts I was replying to. You’re
> right.
>
> 1I wonder if the matter for you is the preference of one science over the
> other or that you take both of them as complementary ones in your
> pedagogical courses.
>
> On either case , I wouldn’t think Vygotsky is on your side with
> Behaviorism on what I explained in both my messages. If there’s vagueness
> in my argument in this respect , please refer to them verbatim.
>
> 2 says Vygotsky’s science brings up emancipation.
>
> 3 says “the instrumental bend” , as you take it , is the obstacle in the
> process of emancipation. What’s this “instrumental bend”. It seems you’re
> referring to the periodic divisions in Vygotsky’s career which is not one
> but several.
>
> 4 gives us a clear example of the instrumental bend as the “terminology of
> control”. Then , we have the concept of “control” in both Behaviorism and
> Emancipatory science. In the latter case you don’t like it.
>
> With 5 [as well] we also understand what you cannot come into terms with
> is the “artificial control of behavior” generally even when we pose for the
> choice of the emancipatory science. I think here is where we can find the
> knot. Why is the object-oriented activity an obstacle in the way to
> development. And whether Vygotsky wholly even in his thinking and speech
> rejects this approach? What about his formation of concepts? What about his
> final part in thinking and speech where he emphasizes he , in fact , should
> have chosen a reverse order. That have always taken me to his unread work ,
> that is , the Book of Praxis and Thought.
>
> which 6precisely aims to gain “control” over conditions for development;
> 7only that “control” might be a quite misleading way of posing it…
>
> I very much like to see if this gaining CONTROL over CONDITIONS FOR
> DEVELOPMENT means control-free development is favorable or non-control-free
> development is favorable on dear Alfredo’s view. But the terms “only” and
> “quite misleading” might come to the rescue.
>
> You assert “conditions for development” but you’d like them to be free of
> such controls. Then when I say freedom is on the Earth not in the air , I
> refer you to the Origins and watersheds and genetics of Thoughts. Long ago
> I read your editorial. There was Marx. But I think Felix Mikhailov’s Marx.
> If you have any advice for me to read Marx again to see if practical
> activity with conscious goals is obstacle to free development or conditions
> for development (in which case you should be kind enough to clarify what
> those conditions are which seem favorable to you which you don’t like them
> to be fettered by “controls”) please say what source. This is just a
> prelude to what I wrote previously not concentrating much on your new post.
>
> High regards and best wishes
>
> Haydi
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 4:05 PM Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@ils.uio.no>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Haydi,
>
>
>
> I am not sure if I understand what you mean entirely, specially when I
> arrive at your assertion that I “talk of free development as though it can
> be achieved in a vacuum and in the air”… which I am not sure if you are
> addressing to my prior post; certainly not what I was aiming to do. In any
> case, to take up some of the threads I gather from your e-mail, I’d say we
> can assert the issues of control about behaviourism without rejecting the
> notion of conditions as false or unnecessary. As I said, the issue of
> behaviourism and of controlling others is a question of pedagogy to me; of
> how you organize education and development, as practice, based on that
> epistemology. Not that pedagogy itself can or could exist without
> conditions or conditionings. I think what is interesting is the constrains
> and affordances that come with different approaches as theoretical
> technologies or economies (as means for organizing activity), and what
> forms of activity open up when you consider other approaches.
>
>
>
> I know, for example, some scholars (e.g., A. Surmava) who argue that the
> whole theory of Vygotsky is constrained by having initially accepted the
> S-R scheme as the starting point (adding the third element of cultural
> mediation in the famous triangle), when that initial scheme itself may be
> questioned as an adequate characterization of the most basic principle of
> life to take as starting point.
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
> Alfredo
>
> *From: *<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Haydi Zulfei <
> haydizulfei@gmail.com>
> *Reply to: *"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Date: *Thursday, 16 January 2020 at 18:39
> *To: *"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: useful psychology?
>
>
>
> Alfredo,
>
> I’m just concentrating on your own word whether borrowed or created. How
> is behaviorism the science of controlling people?
>
> The science which allows people to salivate without control , lead their
> lives just by associations which function is carried out by second signals
> as the ringtone functions as the Real food. Is that what you mean?
>
> I might have forgotten Vygotsky and Leontiev. But from what I can take
> from your own saying , it seems that the reverse might be the case. Because
> we reject behaviorism as it does not go far beyond sensation and perception
> to reach true cognition. And as we are talking about sciences , we should
> be familiar with how concepts and categories are acquired. How we ascend
> from the abstract to the concrete. How we form ideas , concepts and
> categories by our acting on the World .That will take us to the concepts of
> necessity and freedom. Vygotsky has much to say how actuality leads to
> concepts. We cry of not being able to have control over our chaotic
> behavior ; therefore we seek shelter in goal-oriented activities. Actions
> conduit not unbridled.
>
> But in this you again see defects , conditions! How can one conduct an
> action without being involved in Conditions (Ecology you say , OK.) ?
> Conditions in the language of philosophy becomes Necessity which concept
> Vygotsky likes and spends times to clarify its coming into being and this
> is the niceties of Vygotsky’s work. One might take thought into word as one
> direct line from external to internal. How energetic he was to see how it
> shapes and it what phases and stages! He takes the blocks as real things
> yet unrecognized or not gone through stages of true cognition. If there are
> not blocks with properties , ideas are not created and blocks are
> conditioned in quasi-real life circumstance (first abstraction from the
> real life situation) as commodities act as units of analysis in Capital.
>
> You , friend , talk of free development as though it can be achieved in
> vacuum and in the air. Right now our unit of analysis in our current
> science is that Bernie Sanders’ Medicare is in the Senate. If we say this
> unit involves the whole world , we have not overestimated it. I hope some
> great scholar won’t ask me if I’m weaving politics or knowledge!
>
> Conditions come their own way out of our checks and controls. Freedom is
> on the ground not in the air. How to know the shackles and how to change
> their ways or how to remove them altogether.
>
> All the best
>
> Haydi
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:45 PM Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@ils.uio.no>
> wrote:
>
> What you write makes sense to me, Michael. I meant behaviorism as a
> science of control from a pedagogy perspective. I use to raise the question
> “what type of pedagogy do arrive at when you take the S-R scheme (and
> conditioning) as your main explanatory scheme?” If you raise the same
> question from a sociocultural perspective, the answer is quite different,
> and allows for issues of freedom in a whole new light.
>
>
>
> In terms of Vygotsky’s positions, I think you render a valid reading.
>
>
>
> Although I think that today’s school curricula in most countries are quite
> explicit on the importance of the “adaptable thinking skills” that you
> refer to, rather than on educating for jobs (although I can see that is
> still the underlying assumption). You can read about those skills in the
> so-called XXIst century skills, very extended in recent educational reforms
> (including critical thinking skills, creativity, collaborative skills,
> digital skills…). I am afraid, though, that the ecosocial crises that we
> are facing are very quickly and patently showing how narrow our
> understandings of the sort of skills needed to survive in the XXIst century
> are. I think that what the climate crisis is showing us is that we need to
> connect those notions of thinking with the practical socio-economical
> organization of power and of the relations of humans with nature. I don’t
> remember now where I read that a scientist had been including spikes of
> civil activism, disobedience, and social disrest in his/her climate
> prediction computer models, and was showing that these were the only
> variables that may have a largest, quickest effect in achieving the gas
> emission reductions needed (if you can reduce the solution to reducing gas
> emissions…). I think events today are re-writing the way “progressing
> towards a modern world” made concious thinking more relevant… But this is a
> digression, sorry!
>
>
>
> Alfredo
>
> *From: *<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of "Glassman,
> Michael" <glassman.13@osu.edu>
> *Reply to: *"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Date: *Thursday, 16 January 2020 at 15:49
> *To: *"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: useful psychology?
>
>
>
> Hi Alfredo and Andy,
>
>
>
> I am not sure I agree with this characterization of behaviorism.
> Especially at the time he was writing behaviorism was for the most part I
> think focusing on the behaviors of individuals rather than going inside the
> head to understand what individuals did. It cast quite a wide net, from
> Thorndike to Mead. But I don’t think at this point that Vygotsky had a dog
> in a cognitive/behaviorist fight (maybe I am wrong). I sort of see Vygotsky
> at this point as not so much discussing control of individuals by those
> outside them (at least not directly) but the ways individuals are able to
> control the ecologies around them. He sees this occurring in two possible
> ways, being able to use internalized tools in order to directly control the
> ecology, and being able to control their own thinking so that they can
> actually play (not the right word) with these internalized symbols before
> applying them. He has not difficulty with the former, and all that is
> really necessary is to be taught different applications for limited
> situations. But as we progressed to a modern world the ability to lead a
> satisfactory life from a small set of applications you might say becomes
> more and more difficult. Humans developed more abstract thinking,
> controlling their thoughts to deal with a quickly changing and heterogenous
> ecology, but this demanded conscious effort on the part of social
> interlocutors (formal teaching). The difficulty he raises in the socialist
> alteration of man is that this type of conscious effort was limited to only
> a small population that then used their more adaptable thinking skills (I
> am hesitant to say advanced) to manipulate (to differentiate from control)
> those who were on the lower rungs of society. I mean we continue to do this
> today when we argue to educate students for specific jobs but do not offer
> broader education in thinking (there is nothing wrong in training in skills
> such as mechanics and plumbing, but unless we teach people to manipulate
> their thinking about those skills they will never really have control of
> what they do in a complex society. I don’t think that is what Vygotsky was
> writing about in Crisis, but it does set up a road map for where he wants
> to go, which I actually think you can see in part even in his dissertation
> on Hamlet.
>
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On
> Behalf Of *Alfredo Jornet Gil
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 16, 2020 7:34 AM
> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: useful psychology?
>
>
>
> Andy, all,
>
>
>
> Behaviorism as the science of controlling people, as the opposite of an
> emancipatory science, is exactly how I teach it in my learning theory
> courses. I too find the most useful reading of Vygotsky’s attempts as
> aiming at an emancipatory science, although clearly the instrumental bend
> in some of the formulations gets in the way, including the terminology of
> “control” that also characterized, for example, Dewey’s ideas on inquiry.
> “The artificial control of behavior” could for example be as well
> formulated as the object-oriented activity of a social movement, which
> precisely aims to gain “control” over conditions for development; only that
> “control” might be a quite misleading way of posing it…
>
>
>
> Alfredo
>
>
>
> *From: *<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Andy Blunden <
> andyb@marxists.org>
> *Reply to: *"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Date: *Thursday, 16 January 2020 at 12:52
> *To: *"xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: useful psychology?
>
>
>
> Michael, I simply take Vygotsky at his (translated) word. He wants "a
> scientific theory which would lead to the subordination and mastery of the
> mind, to the artificial control of behaviour" and whether he likes
> Munsterberg or personality testing for jobs is, to me, irrelevant.
>
> Now there *is *an ambiguity in Vygotsky's claim. Behaviourism, for
> example, I would define as the science of controlling people, and as such
> is the opposite of an emancipatory science. What Vygotsky is mainly
> interested in, on the other hand, is giving to people the capacity to
> control *their own* mind. But this is not clear from the above, and maybe
> Vygotsky himself wasn't clear. His writing on "socialist man" and the
> business with lie detectors suggest that there were some blind spots there.
>
> Anyway, I was only interested in using the quote for my own purposes in
> contrasting the academic literature on "social Movement Studies" and that
> genre of social movement literature written by and for activist, which is
> usually narrative or autobiographical in style, and in the above sense
> "technic" rather than "epistemology."
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------
>
> *Andy Blunden*
> Hegel for Social Movements
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!KGKeukY!mrT6LtMASo6iMbjfKmsIkMmzZQzGLVGZkfw0x1WC8SwszUCXq-0wxCJX5hQJe8BHX5U$>
> Home Page
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!KGKeukY!mrT6LtMASo6iMbjfKmsIkMmzZQzGLVGZkfw0x1WC8SwszUCXq-0wxCJX5hQJhs-ll44$>
>
> On 16/01/2020 6:42 am, Glassman, Michael wrote:
>
> I don’t know, the sense I get is that he was really criticizing
> Musterberg, not embracing him, at least from what I read in Crisis.
> Vygotsky seems to believe we should be wary of this idea of a practical
> psychology that can use empirical means to look predict human behavior. One
> hint I get from the piece is his mention of using practical psychology to
> determine whether people should be tram drivers. To me it sounds like he
> was arguing also against the rising use of intelligence tests as a
> psychological tool. James brought over Musterberg in part I think to
> explore the idea of empirical psychology and Musterberg it seems wound up
> merging empirical and practical in ways that Vygotsky thought might be
> detrimental, rightfully suggesting it would send psychology towards the
> types of practical models of the physical sciences where it did not belong,
> something that I think has plagued the field since. At least from my
> reading of this piece is that Vygotsky also found it confusing that
> Musterberg by following James was also grabbing hold of an idealist vision
> of psychology, that people behave in certain ways because they were human.
> Vygotsky seemed to think that there was no way to reconcile this. At this
> moment I see this as sort of a precursor of where Vygotsky wanted to go,
> finding a way to merge the idealist vision with a material approach but not
> falling into a trap in either direction. He did not want to be Wundt and he
> did not want to be Musterberg, he definitely wanted nothing to do with the
> intelligence testers who combined “empirical” and practical psychology for
> ideological reasons (just recently heard about Thomas Teo’s idea of
> epistemic violence. I think that might fit in here).
>
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On Behalf Of *Jussi Silvonen
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 15, 2020 1:15 PM
> *To:* mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> <mcole@ucsd.edu>; eXtended Mind,
> Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: useful psychology?
>
>
>
> Mike,
>
>
>
> take a look at Internet Archive (archive.org
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/archive.org__;!!KGKeukY!g0z5AnYuBtHP1ztZp9gfyRkHQd8Mrc9viBg9aABVwZWMofGVfc-82HDzu8YQME58uggdq0Hr$>),
> you can find PDF files of most of Münsterberg's books there. It is obvious,
> that Müsterberg had  a great influence on LSV, at least in his theory's
> instrumental phase.
>
>
>
> JusSi
>
> ----------------
> Jussi Silvonen
> Dosentti
> Itä-Suomen yliopisto, Joensuun kampus
> Kasvatustieteiden ja psykologian osasto
> PL 111 (Metria)
> 80101 Joensuu
> ------------------
> https://wiki.uef.fi/display/~jsilvone@uef.fi/Home
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/wiki.uef.fi/display/*jsilvone@uef.fi/Home__;fg!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIe9sFnfP$>
> https://uef.academia.edu/JussiSilvonen
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/uef.academia.edu/JussiSilvonen__;!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIREamwTv$>
> http://www.mendeley.com/profiles/jussi-silvonen/
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.mendeley.com/profiles/jussi-silvonen/__;!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIRbRK5sy$>
> ------------------------------
>
> *Lähettäjä:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <
> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> käyttäjän mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
> puolesta
> *Lähetetty:* keskiviikko 15. tammikuuta 2020 19.56
> *Vastaanottaja:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >
> *Aihe:* [Xmca-l] Re: useful psychology?
>
>
>
> In my view, Munsterberg was no fool and was deeply immersed in the problem
> of the "two psychologies" that LSV sought to supercede. For a quick take on
> "psychotechnics" in work, check his book out on google and search the term.
> For example,
>
>
>
> Psychotechnics is really a technical science related to a causal
> [experimental-mc] psychology as engineering is related to physics.
> Psychotechnics necessarily refers to the future while the psychohistorical
> sciences refer to the past. (Munsterg, 1915, p.354)
>
>
>
> It would be interesting to stage a discussion bertween Munsterberg and
> LSV.  Which one would have more to say for his accomplishments view from,
> say, 2020?
>
>
>
> And if someone has a pdf of the book, please sing out!
>
> mike
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 8:25 AM Glassman, Michael <glassman.13@osu.edu>
> wrote:
>
> I don’t know, I read it that he was criticizing Munsterberg with his
> discussion of psychotechnics, which I guess was the title of Munsterberg’s
> last book. To meet it reads like Vygotsky was thinking Munsterberg was
> falling into a dangerous materialist trap. Maybe that’s what you are saying
> Andy.
>
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On
> Behalf Of *Andy Blunden
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 15, 2020 2:39 AM
> *To:* xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: useful psychology?
>
>
>
> This is what I was looking for:
>
> https://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/crisis/psycri12.htm#p1207
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.marxists.org*2Farchive*2Fvygotsky*2Fworks*2Fcrisis*2Fpsycri12.htm*p1207__*3BIw!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBkzm3Ep0s*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412462637&sdata=OBOvR6IPfkMeN4eKIcrZXz5aDBjX1t5LB6LokEBXrDg*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlKiUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIXDWyWWT$>
>
> It was the exclusion of "psychotechnics" from the fundamental problems of
> psychology which he objected to. On the contrary, the philosophy of
> practice provided all the solutions to these problems. "The goal of such
> a psychology is not Shakespeare in concepts, as it was for Dilthey, but *in
> one word – psychotechnics*, i.e., a scientific theory which would lead to
> the subordination and mastery of the mind, to the artificial control of
> behaviour."
>
> Thanks all.
> Andy
> ------------------------------
>
> *Andy Blunden*
> Hegel for Social Movements
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fbrill.com*2Fview*2Ftitle*2F54574__*3B!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBk8iLcReg*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412472638&sdata=hBx7qflf4m9p8uTE*2B4alLHqD4n1aMpxrwmV7dWRuyqc*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIZm3eJhg$>
> Home Page
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.ethicalpolitics.org*2Fablunden*2Findex.htm__*3B!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBk7OSM06Y*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412472638&sdata=ZI48nZtfz6lMy2*2BE6nm84IFOiB2DeCOirmEhCw3o0qg*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIVQug3id$>
>
> On 15/01/2020 3:09 pm, David Kellogg wrote:
>
> But psychotechnics was really the Soviet version of human resource
> management. The idea was to select particular "types" for particular jobs.
> It wasn't really a Soviet idea--it started in Germany (and in fact, the
> Nazis were very big on it; the selection ramp at Auschwitz was based on
> it). In China, there was also quite a bit of emphasis on making sure that
> people suited the professions chosen for them, as education was a very
> scarce resource.
>
>
>
> Isaac Spielrein--Sabine's brother, who was a colleague of Vygotsky--was a
> psychotechnician; his essay on the language of the Red Army soldier is
> written with that perspective in mind. And it was at a psychotechnic
> conference that Vygotsky was asked if there could be a pedology of adults,
> to aid in psychotechnic selection.
>
>
>
> Vygotsky said no.
>
>
> David Kellogg
>
> Sangmyung University
>
>
>
> New Article: 'Commentary: On the originality of Vygotsky's "Thought and
> Word" i
>
> in *Mind Culture and Activity*
>
> *https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2020.1711775
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.tandfonline.com*2Fdoi*2Ffull*2F10.1080*2F10749039.2020.1711775__*3B!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBktaxJh-A*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412482626&sdata=yllUDzZhK8*2BCHvi8HXvoxP457gXRNAa8VYC*2FPC4PQtc*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIWQuZxxv$>*
>
> Some free e-prints available at:
>
>
> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/SK2DR3TYBMJ42MFPYRFY/full?target=10.1080/10749039.2020.1711775
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.tandfonline.com*2Feprint*2FSK2DR3TYBMJ42MFPYRFY*2Ffull*3Ftarget*3D10.1080*10749039.2020.1711775__*3BLw!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBkmu8ynwE*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412482626&sdata=6*2B8dfqrBCex1zj*2Fmqw0i5RKwp0LGBvcc1zZjt*2BjGEjk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlKiUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIUbsFhIY$>
>
>
>
> New Translation with Nikolai Veresov: "L.S. Vygotsky's Pedological Works
> Volume One: Foundations of Pedology"
>
>
>
>  https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9789811505270
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.springer.com*2Fgp*2Fbook*2F9789811505270__*3B!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBkiawojtY*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412492624&sdata=PDdGgIgXqxWaVkzWvkE*2B24nBKC6nX6Vv*2Bq1mROYzdMk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QISHX4tYT$>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 1:02 PM mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
> Might you be looking for “psychotechnics” Andy?
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 7:35 PM David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Andy--
>
>
>
> That really doesn't sound like Vygotsky to me.
>
>
>
> Yes, he refers to art as the "social technique of emotion" (Psychology of
> Art). Yes, he did experiments on reading "Gentle Breath" to see if Bunin's
> short story had any affect on breathing rates. But as far as I know he had
> nothing to do with Luria's work on lie detectors (in The Nature of Human
> Conflict), and he was even rather skeptical of Luria's work on optical
> illusions in "uneducated" peoples
>
>
>
> . Remember, this is the guy who denied that a general psychology could
> ever cut itself off from practice and vice versa (History of the Crisis in
> Psychology), who rejected the idea that thinking is speech with the sound
> turned off (Thinking and Speech). Besides, who ever heard of a technology
> opposed to an epistemology? What would that mean? A hand without a brain?
>
>
>
> Vygotsky sounds more like this: "Neither the hand nor the brain left to
> itself can do much."  Francis Bacon, *Novum Organum* (1620), Book 1,
> Aphorism 2.
>
>
> David Kellogg
>
> Sangmyung University
>
>
>
> New Article: 'Commentary: On the originality of Vygotsky's "Thought and
> Word" i
>
> in *Mind Culture and Activity*
>
> *https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2020.1711775
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.tandfonline.com*2Fdoi*2Ffull*2F10.1080*2F10749039.2020.1711775__*3B!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBktaxJh-A*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412492624&sdata=BP3oUS62Il2ysAn5qg8wmdRgzXL88z*2FStKI*2Bh6VwUKw*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIW8z2T_v$>*
>
> Some free e-prints available at:
>
>
> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/SK2DR3TYBMJ42MFPYRFY/full?target=10.1080/10749039.2020.1711775
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.tandfonline.com*2Feprint*2FSK2DR3TYBMJ42MFPYRFY*2Ffull*3Ftarget*3D10.1080*10749039.2020.1711775__*3BLw!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBkmu8ynwE*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412502616&sdata=sDCVNon8FCfDczqUlefwc6O6XRxMu7kgYtTX5KhfPSk*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlKiUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIUEJFvpx$>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 11:49 AM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> wrote:
>
> There's somewhere where Vygotsky talks about psychology as a technology as
> opposed to (for example) an epistemology. Can anyone point me to where this
> observation is to be found. I can find it with my search engines. I think
> Vygotsky and Luria's invention of the lie-detector has been mentioned in
> this connection.
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------
>
> *Andy Blunden*
> Hegel for Social Movements
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fbrill.com*2Fview*2Ftitle*2F54574__*3B!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBk8iLcReg*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412502616&sdata=q5ZRtmU7n76mwg2owaHdn8LcNDmLEHxREaF04n263AQ*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QITY6oecw$>
> Home Page
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.ethicalpolitics.org*2Fablunden*2Findex.htm__*3B!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBk7OSM06Y*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412512609&sdata=r3AyHyk8zmlFhrR7IW5kr51MZsY8ohkyUWlVW9jyKpM*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIaQ-1kB-$>
>
> --
>
>  fiction is but a form of symbolic action, a mere game of “as if”, therein
> lies its true   function and its potential for effecting change - R. Ellison
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> For archival resources relevant to the research of myself and other
> members of LCHC, visit
>
> lchc.ucsd.edu
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__http*3A*2Flchc.ucsd.edu__*3B!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBkAj8DVL0*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412512609&sdata=gpiCZeiosXnQSx4T2Qe3TjykJII53mXoOxw290oXsMA*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIX0clSVO$>.
> For a narrative history of the research of LCHC, visit
> lchcautobio.ucsd.edu
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__http*3A*2Flchcautobio.ucsd.edu__*3B!!KGKeukY!kwgYnHOPX75Ybl3Dlo9PqMByhQGk_i4UVIzFuijyPSYMkYPw1dl1syiX0IBkRAeC65Q*24&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412522609&sdata=t2P5tYIsk3GCrG8v5UtA9qX28ejZW*2BnuLzQfRupbPL8*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIfoqvbhu$>
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>  fiction is but a form of symbolic action, a mere game of “as if”,
> therein lies its true   function and its potential for effecting change -
> R. Ellison
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> For archival resources relevant to the research of myself and other
> members of LCHC, visit
>
> lchc.ucsd.edu
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Flchc.ucsd.edu&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412522609&sdata=7SppP1Yvcb2dKzCKoZVcsxSc317*2FVcl6Kpfghe0O2Hg*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIbLpkCwJ$>.
> For a narrative history of the research of LCHC, visit
> lchcautobio.ucsd.edu
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Flchcautobio.ucsd.edu&data=02*7C01*7C*7C65f40880e53e4c1412c508d799e58718*7C87879f2e73044bf2baf263e7f83f3c34*7C0*7C0*7C637147083412532604&sdata=F8KGSR10*2BDM*2BkgdBt*2FCc9Nobo9vvGTCOGRRz6g9P*2FeY*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!KGKeukY!mLhQUKQjrFOMsctcba8YuyUuqdKRguYi_RFCB738kunrmy7tUs2HLGZBW6feWd1QIReAJOUT$>
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20200119/f16d98d1/attachment.html 