Hi Steve, thank you for your question.
I wouldn't say that human labor is a logotechnique, or a technique at all. I
think we could better understand labor as involving the systematic
employment of techniques. On the other hand, and it depends on how we
characterize "labor", it doesn't seem to be prior to speech - at least, if
we think of labor as involving cooperation based on shared meanings.
Rgrds,
Luiz Carlos Baptista
lucabaptista@sapo.pt
lucabaptista@hotmail.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Gabosch" <bebop101@comcast.net>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: terça-feira, 30 de Setembro de 2003 9:47
Subject: Re: research - writing, printing, computing
> Very interesting studies, Luiz. I have a question to throw at you, too.
>
> You state "Writing would be the fundamental "logotechnique", giving rise
to
> printing (mechanization of writing) and computing (automation of
writing)."
>
> My question is, since labor and speech preceded writing, why isn't
speech -
> or, in my opinion, more likely - human labor activity - the fundamental
> logotechnique?
>
> Thanks for joining xmca!
>
> - Steve Gabosch
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 01 2003 - 01:00:08 PDT