About the "separation" to which Eric had reffered to "(...) behavior that is goal orientated from that which occurs in a framework of spontanaity"
My thinking is that the spontaneity of an ACTION in the frame of a certain ACTIVITY is linked necessarily to some goal - and to some motive. A spontaneous behaviour, in my oppinion, does not have to be non-goal oriented.
Spontaneity can be the capacity to react without "closing" inside a desire or something you wanna do - and that you don't make it because of "n" reasons.
The freshness - or novelty - usually conected to spontaneity lays, in my oppinion, on this unpredicted "reaction" to something "scripted" by sociocultural injuctions.
Probably because of this it is always associated to laugh. Because it can reveal our human condiction or that we can go beyond conditionated reflexes and "create" or "answer" in an "unthinkable" way.
A teacher can be spontaneous without discharging her/his pedagogical goals. For example, let's suppose you have to present to students a certain text written by a certain author. You can do this in "n" non-scripted ways. An not necessarily by a "formal" presentation of it. Your GOAL is present it. But HOW you will do it it's up to U.
Ricardo Ottoni Vaz Japiassu
Professor da Universidade do Estado da Bahia-Uneb X
http://www.ricardojapiassu.pro.br
In my thinking, the behaviour that occurs "in a framework of spontaneity" does not, necessarily, have to be non-goal oriented. The spontaneity of any ACTION in the frame of a certain ACTIVITY must be linked to the motives and goals of a one. Doesn't it?
Although a
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 01 2002 - 01:00:07 PDT