Re: [xmca] Engagement with Activity Theory.

[Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>]

On 26 December 2011 06:28, christine schweighart <
schweighartgate@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> Dear Mike,
>
> I read  your joint article in the special issue of T&P 2011 and
> appreciated the notion of mutual appropriation - I was contrasting with,
> and have not found myself able to 'project' into 'formative teaching
> experment'  - though this would be another thread. Also in that issue Yryo
> used a definition of 'intervention' from Gerald Midgley, who I am working
> with now, his contribution has been to introduce a concept of 'boundary
> critique' -influenced by Ullrich -into  'Critical Systems Thinking'.
>
> I became interested in 'activity theory' after responding to a call for
> papers for ISCAR 2005 Seville - and you responded! Also in that conference
> you gave a very moving talk WITH from and back to your audience - I enjoyed
> that - but of course the 'content' has now gone in memory.  It was only
> when Seth Chaiklin moved to the UK and 'rounded up'  stragglers that I
> engaged 'theoretically', very slowly and with very different values about
> research, but I got to the question I asked Andy, and still have -  in
> there somewhere-my historical traces to understand my communions and
> differences etc..  Going back into 'systems'  - with  the opacity of
> 're-entry',  initial dialogues show appreciation ' we haven't got a theory
> of activity' :).  Though their background has a stong history of community
> developmental work, and environmental developmental intervention .
>
> In using this list serve, my email doesn't seem to 'reply' to messages in
> the way others mange to- I don't get a smooth 'title' and copy message, so
> I've not just quite got the hang of this. It meant that I couldn't direct
> comments - so early on I 'lost' responding to David Kellog on the
> discussion f the wine and bottles - and also on the talk of recognition. I
> have attempted to present a distinction of subjectification and
> 'appreciation' in recent talks - but this is 'unappreciated' with those
> deeply immersed in the notion of subjectification --  So I read greg's
> comments and will re-read the whole thread- it went very quickly!
>

You can have more than one gmail account, Christine, which supports
indented replies etc.  I can't think of a good reason to use hotmail, yahoo
mail etc. unless you're fond of flashing adverts.  It sounds like enough
you're experiencing enough hassle to make the leap?


>
> Also I can't get an 'automatic' email to open on Bruce's link ( same
> problem with my hotmail set up) - so if there are any guidelines as to what
> is acceptable in terms of links to other websites etc  please point me
> there( and how to 'reply' in threads  with more focus/proximity). Live
> links are stripped out , sometimes they are 'accidentally' cut and pasted
> in haste, - but don't know the trouble this might provoke your server etc.
>

These are text that are interpreted by browser/mail client program.
Automatic emails are down to your local set up.  The distinctions between
processes (and data) running locally and those distributed are being
increasingly blurred.

Huw


>
> Many thanks, Christine.
>
>
>
>  __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca