Mike,
A discussion in the fall sounds like a good idea, in the meantime thanks for
the references.
Mervi is sending her abstract to you, and hopefully you can post it.
Thanks, Vera
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Cole" <mcole@weber.ucsd.edu>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 10:34 AM
Subject: what chat means
>
> I am agnostic on Phil's call for a glossary, although as a vehicle for
> discussion, creating a "key word" facility on the web and allowing various
> individuals to post their understandings might facilitate identification
> of important fault lines around which we might cluster (or might not, who
> knows).
>
> At one level what chat means is the following: A rejection of the idea
that
> there are in-principle, irreconcilable differences between the ideas
> developed by Vygotsky-Luria-Leontiev prior to 1931 or so associated with
> the creationg of the unit in Kharkov. This does not mean there were no
> differences. Dima Leontiev says he has a copy of a letter in which ANL
> lays out his differences with Vygotsky and Luria, Eugene Matusove has
> an article in New Ideas in Psychology criticizing LSV in what he terms
> sociocultural terms, and if you read the special issues of J. of Soviet
> Psych that I published on the Kharkov school in about 1981 you will see
> that LSV is little in evidence.
>
> But it does mean that in later years Luria and Leontiev managed to
cooperate
> productively in institution building, until death and re-hardened
political
> times erroded their efforts (not, they jointly published a paper which
appeared
> in a book edited by Wolman on theories in psychology with criticisms of
> LSV in addition to laying out their views of his values).
>
> When the original fractionation occured, it did so in a context of terror
> that most of us can't imagine outside of fictional movie theatres, but it
> was real enough and horribly destructive of human relationships, never
mind
> their lives.
>
> Vera noted these issues in proposing a discussion of socio-cultural/AT
> tensions. Since this topic did not win out for AERA, perhaps it would be
> worth noting a time for its discussion here..... in the fall, I would
> suggest, since mobility in the summer makes participation more than
> usually sketchy.
>
> Other linkages, cricitisms, etc, could of course be taken up as well.
>
> mike
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 01 2002 - 01:00:11 PDT