I would say that, yes, the challenge to be taken up
in proleptic orientation towards the specific
cultural myths we would like to participate in the future
of cultures more open to criscrossing of boundaries
is a challenge of developing a language of the psychosocial
that starts more globally, more inclusively
than with "mind" and "mental" (masculine)
I think that the Leontiev alphabet
of "activity", "action", "operation"
can be taken as the starting point for a spelling out of this language
Meanwhile
I see the "need" that puts Diane at a loss
in the dynamic selfperpetuation of the societal structures of today.
(to be crossed only at a price)
Not least the structures of educational systems
the compartments of selectively preparing for
a today written forward into tomorrow
and the day after next
*demand* a culture of individual minds,
exchanges in the currency of "mental operations"
which makes the persistent invention of counterlanguage all the more urgent
Eva