Did I miss something? I am not sure I am following you. I commented
with "community?" because I saw it addressing a "cultural concrete" so
to speak. We tend to use culture as a "cultural specific" and a
"cultural general" which can make it confusing times (Both are useful).
I saw "community" as in Engestrom's triangle as a useful way to get at
it. I guess community would get more at the "culture concrete", at least
for me. I envision more than one triangle here, don't you? ;-)
I am not sure what Eugene's sociocultural approach is, so was not
intentionally making a connection. :-)
N
Mike Cole wrote:
>Nate-- So are you proposing that norms/values aspects of culture, which
>is, I agree with Phil, everywhere in the system, the most likely place
>to links up the Engestrom rep of activity with what Eugene would characterize
>as a sociocultural approach?
>mike
>
>
>
>
-- There is no hope of finding the sources of free action in the lofty realms of the mind or in the depths of the brain. The idealist approach of the phenomenologists is as hopeless as the positive approach of the naturalists. To discover the sources of free action it is necessary to go outside the limits of the organism, not into the intimate sphere of the mind, but into the objective forms of social life; it is necessary to seek the sources of human consciousness and freedom in the social history of humanity. To find the soul it is necessary to lose it. A.R. Luriavygotsky@charter.net http://webpages.charter.net/schmolze1/vygotsky/index.html http://marxists.org/subject/psychology/index.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 01 2002 - 01:00:11 PDT