'twas intended for xmca
Happy new year!
-----Original Message-----
From: Vera John-Steiner [mailto:vygotsky@unm.edu]
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 1:02 PM
To: diamonju@rci.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: Who can object to a little subjecting?
Hi,
Perhaps, our problem is that we follow the general dichotomy between
objective and subjective rather than seeing them as interwoven processes. As
I am writing this sentence, I use a socially shared form of communication,
the English language (objectified in a dictionary, subjectively inflected
with my multilingual past, the distinction resonant of Vygotsky's meaning
and sense.).
I think with you, puzzling your collective thoughts, while contributing my
particular understanding of CHAT, collaborating in making explicit my lived
experience which is always a mixture of his/herstory shaped by world
events, and the specificity of where we stand and breathe at a particular
moment. To me objective is a temporarily verifiable fact, where the methods
and instruments of verification change, all the time. But holding on to a
moment of agreement
about a "fact" is useful, it is a moment of pause while we engage in the
endless questioning.
Vera
-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Diamondstone <judith.diamondstone@verizon.net>
To: Paul H.Dillon <illonph@pacbell.net>
Cc: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Date: Saturday, December 29, 2001 10:57 PM
Subject: RE: Who can object to a little subjecting?
>Paul, thanks for the clarification. But why wouldn't individual psychology
>be relevant to understanding culture? Have you read Valerie Walkerdine? You
>won't like her, but she makes a good case for psychology -- specifically,
>working class psychology, which she argues poses a threat to the many
>projects, Marxism included, that attempt to fix, transform, &/or regulate
>the working class. But that aside, it seems significant that those on xmca
>who problematize 'lived experience,' make of it an object of concern, tend
>to be women & gays, members of non-dominant groups; the ones who dismiss it
>as irrelevant or even misleading (threatening?) are all guys. Do you think
>there's any cultural significance to that?
>
>
>Judy
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 11 2002 - 09:22:33 PST
The LCHC website last updated in 2022. The files now available herein are being maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes. The content of the site has not been altered or updated since archiving. Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards. If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site, please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.