Hi Paul,
I think more than just the two of us will agree that more effort is necessary to, in shorthand, sharpen the language surrounding ch activity theory. There are several areas I have put on the back burner -- the quantitative connections for example between the categories of production, exchange, consumption with economics, system dynamics, complexity theory -- perhaps the former would be obvious for the economists at my alma mater. Another is clarifying the boundaries, and this is closer to the front burner.
>This comes to mind most clearly when considering the
>problem of division of labor and subject or the delineation of the patterns
>in which the primary contradiction plays itself out and determines the
>secondary, etc. contradictions.
The sequencing of primary to secondary, etc. in expansive activity is an ordering that has been puzzling me too. I can't say my own latest data support that particular sequence, but also as a partially retrospective account, any pattern may be hidden behind the resolution of the data. But with you, my hunch is this could be a highly productive problematic. There certainly is lots of work to do.
bb
-- Bill Barowy, Associate Professor Lesley University 29 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790 Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169 http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Barowy.html _______________________ "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."]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 01 2001 - 01:01:57 PDT