Re: [xmca] Human Sciences linking with CHAT

[Patrick Jaki <patrick.jaki@gmail.com>]

Dear Larry,

I was interested in the chapter you downloaded on values. Do you perhaps
have a link or a pdf somewhere.

Regards.
Jaki

On 12 July 2010 07:40, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Kevin and Mike
>
> I'm away from the internet on the "gulf Islands" off of Vancouver.  I have
> to go to the library in the village to get on the web.
> However, yesterday I downloaded the chapter on human sciences and learning
> and I want to say how powerfully the article speaks to me.
>
> It puts at the forefront the fundamental need to explicitly discuss values
> and explaining how we ought to proceed.  It then speaks to agency but more
> explicitly MORAL agency and says it is a very slippery concept.  I agree it
> is slippery but also fundamental to notions of learning. Learning in
> schools
> is about developing moral agency and I welcome the explicit call to examine
> various accounts of moral agency.  The 3rd framework asking us to
> be explicit about our teleological assumptions is also a fundamental point
> of discussion when we explore where we believe we are headed in the future.
> Finally, the question, Who gets to decide? is of central importance to
> notions of mutuality in learning.
> It is my hope that others on CHAT see these as central questions to
> explore.  Kevin, you mentioned human sciences embrace the "interpretive
> turn" and there is also discussions of the "relational turn" and the
> "sociocultural turn" which I see as challenging "the linquistic turn" and
> "postmodernism" and returning the focus to values and "traditions" and
> "forms of life".  Activity and mediation are central concepts in the human
> sciences as you outlined but it is moral activity and questioning how we
> ought to proceed that is central to activity.
>
> Kevin, you  mention that history as  a discipline is a core area of inquiry
> in the human sciences and learning.  From this perspective "thinking" [how
> we conceptualize the processes of conceptualizing] is a historical process.
> >From this perspective the history of philosophy is the history of
> thinking.
> Thinking develops historically as documented in the history of philosophy.
> Therefore thinking as a human science can gain insights by exploring how we
> have historically conceptualized conceptualizing.
> For example is the metaphor of thinking "as reading text" the dominant
> metaphor or is the metaphor of speech "as dialogue" a better metaphor of
> thinking or the more recent metaphor of thinking as "information
> processing"
> the dominant metaphor?  By historical inquiry into the history of
> philosophy
> learning as a human science can be enriched and our horizons of
> understanding expanded.
>
> Larry
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>



-- 
Patrick Jaki
Forced Migration Studies Programme
University of The Witwatersrand.
Work: 27 11 717 3166
P. O Box 505 Wits
2050
Johannesburg
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca