individual activity?

Rolfe Windward (IBALWIN who-is-at mvs.oac.ucla.edu)
Wed, 25 Oct 95 18:52 PDT

Mike's question raises an interesting point: does mediation demand the
immediate presence of others. As Michael comments, the notion of individual
activity seems relevant in Leontiev's approach but why is that concession
necessary? It seems to honor the biological, a generally good idea in my
view, but if we accept the notion that human behavior is primarily
epigenetic what does that gain us theoretically? It actually sounds a bit
like Edelman's distinction between primary and secondary consciousness.

Let's see if the following vignette helps in unpacking this notion -- how
"social" is the following?

In the spring of 1976 I began the construction of a home in the Rocky
Mountains of Colorado that I completed late in that fall. With the exception
of infrequent visits to town for supplies I was almost completely isolated.
Some of the tools I knew how to use from previous work as a carpenter,
others such as the froe, adze and draw knife I had to figure out (and have
the scars to prove it but the tools were preferable to using my teeth). Now,
there is indeed a cabin in the Rockies that I built - I was clearly the
primary agent of it's construction but ... was I really acting individually?
Who made the tools? Where did my knowledge of them and/or my ability to
deduce their use arise? From whence came the notion of a cabin or for that
matter the (whacky) notion of building one alone?

Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind some alternative answers to that last
question myself (I already have some of my own but they still don't make a
lot of sense when I try to speak them aloud) :-)

Regards,

Rolfe Windward
GSE&IS
ibalwin who-is-at mvs.oac.ucla.edu