So proceeding rhetorically then, and taking cue from Don Cunningham, who
writes about the evolution of best practices. :-) Don's last point is,
also at first blush, similar to Ernst von Glasersfeld's writing about the
adaptation and viability of knowledge and to the work by Lumsden and Wilson
'Mind, Genes and Culture' who wrote about 'Culturgens' much as we seem to
write about practices and artifacts.
FYI, L&M define culturgens this way: a culturgen is a relatively
homogeneous set of [archeological] artifacts, behaviors, or mentifacts
(mental constructs having little or no direct correspondance with reality)
that either share without exception one or more attribute states selected
for their functional importance or a least share a consistently recurrent
range of such attribute states within a given polythetic set.
As one thinks of participation with artifacts in an ecosocial sense, then
it is attractive to describe dimensions of functional importance, which
might have implications for how practices might compete, be valued, be
substituted, and evolve. Does this make sense? Can you folks tell me what
you think of work in this area?
Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
Technology in Education
Lesley College, 29 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790
Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
_______________________
"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]