[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Re: microgenesis?
Huw
Also from the same etymology dictionary is:
*dia* = though or throughout from root of *duo* = sense of twice
Therefore,
dialogue is NOT to be confused with *di*. A mistaken belief that dialogue
means conversation between two persons. This notion is more accurately
*duologue*
*dia* and *di* are often confused.
*********************************************************************************
Also
lytic = pertaining to lysis from Greek *lytikos* = able to loose from
*lytos* meaning loosed from *lyen" - to unfasten, untie
******************************************************************************
Therefore:
*dialytic* could mean = twice returning to *see through* as a process to
loosen or unfasten or untie what was previously undifferentiated and global
Vygotsky's technique or method of dual stimulation may possibly be linked
to a dialytic process.
Larry
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>wrote:
> On 15 October 2012 23:36, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Certainly no harm in free associating, but perhaps better not to freely
> > interpret. It would indeed be difficult to interpret lytical as meaning
> > "loosening" in the text you provided. But it does leave me still
> wondering
> > why the word was translated as "lytical". And as to how this might
> contrast
> > with "critical" - I'm at a loss. (but the do set up a nice rhyme scheme).
> >
> >
> "turning point in a disease" according to this etymology dictionary:
>
>
> http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=crisis&searchmode=none
>
> Huw
>
> As for the rest, the molecular accumulation model of "lytic"(?) and
> > "gradual" development does suggest that there is a place for the kind of
> > concern with micro-interactional contexts that are of most interest to
> me -
> > even if those contexts don't show abrupt and critical developments. So
> the
> > gist of this passage remains appealing even if I can't make sense of the
> > "long-term cryptic molecular process" that V is describing. Anyone else
> > have insight here?
> >
> > -greg
> >
> > p.s. The mole spirit may be a bit too much reification of development for
> > me.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I see no harm in a bit of free association here, Greg. Here is
> Vygotsky's
> > > own words on the topic.
> > > (I have bolded what Vygotsky associates with lytcal and underlined what
> > he
> > > is contrasting with lytical):
> > >
> > > By purely empirical studies, psychology established that age-level
> > > changes may, in the words of Blonsky, occur _abruptly and
> > > critically_, or may occur *gradually and lytically*. Blonsky terms
> > > as /periods and stages /the times of the child’s life that are
> > > separated from one another by more (periods) or less (stages)
> > > _abrupt crises_; phases are times of the child’s life separated from
> > > each other *lytically*.
> > >
> > > Actually, at certain age levels, development is marked by *slow,
> > > evolutionary, or lytic flow*. These are age levels of predominantly
> > > *smooth and frequently unremarkable internal change* in the child’s
> > > personality, change that is accomplished by *insignificant
> > > “molecular” attainments*. Here, over a *more or less long time* that
> > > usually takes several years, no _fundamental, abrupt shifts and
> > > alterations_ occur that _reconstruct_ _the child’s whole
> > > personality_. More or less remarkable changes in the child’s
> > > personality occur here only as a result of a *long-term cryptic
> > > “molecular” process*. They appear outside and are accessible to
> > > direct observation *only as a conclusion of long-term processes of
> > > latent development*.
> > >
> > > During r*elatively firm or stable* ages, development occurs mainly
> > > through *microscopic change*s in the child’s personality *that
> > > accumulate* to a _certain limit_ and _then appear spasmodically in
> > > the form of some kind of neoformation_ of the age level.
> > >
> > > "Well burrowed, Old Mole!"
> > > http://www.marxists.org/**glossary/terms/o/l.htm#old-**mole<
> > http://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/o/l.htm#old-mole>
> > >
> > > Andy
> > >
> > > Greg Thompson wrote:
> > >
> > >> and one last pitch for my (blind!) interpretation of "lytic":
> > >>
> > >> Lytic as loosening or breaking down before re-incorporation feels to
> me
> > a
> > >> lot like Hegel's "aufheben" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Aufheben<
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufheben>)
> > >> or "sublation" of the two elements in the dialectic. Lysing as taking
> > apart
> > >> the pieces and assembling them into something new that couldn't
> > otherwise
> > >> have been. That is Hegelian genesis, no? The source of creativity?
> > >> At bottom, all "development" (regardless of timescale) involves the
> > >> problem of change and creativity. How does something new come into
> being
> > >> that wasn't already there?
> > >>
> > >> And as I said, my interpretation of "lytic" is severely blind and
> Andy's
> > >> reading of the text suggests to me that I am connecting a few too many
> > >> dots. But it is fun business to try to make (new?) sense of these
> > things.
> > >>
> > >> I'm currently looking into aktualgenese in the Leipsig tradition, but
> I
> > >> don't know the extent of Hegel's influence there. I assume that
> Vygotsky
> > >> would have been influenced by folks there, but the names I'm coming
> > across
> > >> there don't seem to come up in Vygotsky's writings much - Wilhelm
> Wundt,
> > >> Friederich Sander, Kleine-Hurst, and Erich Wohlfart. Certainly
> Vygotsky
> > >> would have known of Wundt, but are there meaningful links here from
> > >> aktualgenese to Vygotsky's notion of genesis and development?
> > >>
> > >> Hopefully tomorrow I'll be able to return to micro-genesis - right
> now,
> > >> too busy trying to rock my little micro-genetic to sleep. Hard to type
> > >> while swaying back and forth...
> > >>
> > >> -greg
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:26 AM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com
> <mailto:
> > >> lchcmike@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Thanks very much Andy and all who jumped in to indicate their
> > >> interest.
> > >> I will replace the file online at lchc website with Andy's
> > >> improved version.
> > >>
> > >> The re-admiration of "lytic" that Greg introduced is really
> thought
> > >> provoking to me. It also puts me in mind of the meaning of culture
> > >> that
> > >> goes with biological research which urges us to think about the
> > >> relation
> > >> between culture and "medium." All useful.
> > >>
> > >> With respect to the polysemy of "development" and "learning." In
> > >> *The Construction Zone, *Denis Newman, Peg Griffen, and I
> struggled
> > >> enough so that we often gave up and used "change" which of course
> > >> elides the difficulties but does not solve them.
> > >>
> > >> With respect to this learning/development discussion I think we
> > >> are still
> > >> struggling to get ourselves clear about whether the notion of
> > "genetic
> > >> domain" or "time scales" matters. In this discussion, at least, I
> > have
> > >> been struggling to get us to focus on short time intervals. Very
> > >> often,
> > >> as in Andy's earlier notes and in Helen's recent note with the
> > helpful
> > >> reminders about Marianne H's writing, the time scale is
> > >> *ontogenetic -*
> > >> years.
> > >>
> > >> I am all for discussion of these time scales!! But the issue that
> > >> Greg put
> > >> on the table was about micro time scales (or I thought that was
> > >> what the
> > >> topic was). From our discussion so far (I have not had a chance to
> > >> read
> > >> Huw's note carefully and have certainly forgotten other relevant
> > >> contribution, so I may be overgeneralizing) I got the strong
> > >> impression that
> > >> it was being argued that at short time scales, the term
> > >> development in any
> > >> meaningful sense, does not apply.
> > >>
> > >> So, being interested in notions like a zone of proximal
> > >> development, which
> > >> presumably applies to interactions on a time scale closer to
> > >> minutes than
> > >> lifetimes, I have tried to get a focus there.
> > >>
> > >> I am arguing that if the term, development, is inappropriate at
> this
> > >> briefer time scale, then there should be some very serious
> > >> reconsideration
> > >> of Vygotsky's use of the zone of proximal development, since
> > >> development
> > >> would be ruled out in all the examples he gives by virtue of the
> > >> short time
> > >> scale. So people who confuse a zone of proximal learning for a
> zone
> > of
> > >> proximal development have been right all along, just using
> > misleading
> > >> terminology.
> > >>
> > >> mike
> > >> PS-- And while we are at it, a reconsideration of LSV's idea that
> > in a
> > >> zoped "one step in learning" should produce "two steps in
> > >> development" also
> > >> seems in order. My intuition is that Davydov was trying to point
> > >> us right
> > >> at that problem, and that his germ cell approach to development
> > >> was his way
> > >> of trying to deal with the issue, but others could probably speak
> > >> to that
> > >> better than I.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> *
> > >> *
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> > >> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Mike, I have attached a modified version of the document about
> > >> "Question
> > >> > Asking Reading." Two pages which were out of order have been
> > >> replaced in
> > >> > order and I have embedded OCR so it should be searchable.
> > >> Perhaps you could
> > >> > replace NEWTECHN.pdf
> > >> <http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/****NEWTECHN.pdf<
> > http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/**NEWTECHN.pdf>
> > >> <http://lchc.**ucsd.edu/People/NEWTECHN.pdf<
> > http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/NEWTECHN.pdf>
> > >> >>
> > >> > on the server with this one?
> > >> >
> > >> > Now, my hat off to the authors of this paper. I am sure others
> > >> on this
> > >> > list knew about *Question Asking Reading*, but I was not one of
> > >> them. You
> > >> > define reading as "/expanding/ the ability to mediate one's
> > >> interactions
> > >> > with the environment by interpreting text." You recognise that a
> > >> child
> > >> > already has an ability to "read the world" and is probably
> already
> > >> > proficient in mediating their reading of the world by
> > >> interacting with
> > >> > adults, so learning to read is constructed upon this base. This
> > >> is clearly
> > >> > drawing on Vygotsky (credit to Piaget as well), and taking
> > >> reading as a
> > >> > specific kind of collaborative process rather than just a
> > >> technical process
> > >> > of decoding. You call on Luria's idea of "combined motor method"
> > to
> > >> > introduce an approach to combining diagnostic tasks with
> > >> teaching tasks.
> > >> > And you call on A N Leontyev to solve the crucial problem of the
> > >> child's
> > >> > motivation for learning to read.
> > >> >
> > >> > (As an aside I much enjoyed the observation of how prominent it
> > >> was for
> > >> > the children to engage in discussion about the relation between
> > >> "growing
> > >> > up" and learning to read. My one and only experience of teaching
> > >> a child to
> > >> > read hinged around this discussion. We were living in a very
> > remote
> > >> > location in the UK and her older brother was old enough to
> > >> attend the
> > >> > mixed-age primary school, but Sam was too young. This
> > >> hyperactive, very
> > >> > physical child suddenly focused on reading with startling
> > >> intensity and
> > >> > learnt to read fluently inside of a week. ... despite our
> > >> explanations
> > >> > about the legal age of public school attendance. But very soon
> > >> the school
> > >> > willingly bent a rule or two and admitted her. :) )
> > >> >
> > >> > Now I grant that my contributions to this thread have not gone
> > >> within a
> > >> > mile of the issues raised in this paper. But my interests and
> > >> experience
> > >> > are in social transformation, not teaching and learning in
> > >> elementary
> > >> > schools. But I am willing to listen and learn.
> > >> >
> > >> > A point of clarification on my side.
> > >> >
> > >> > ZPD. I have heard it said that ZPD is relevant only to the
> > >> critical phases
> > >> > of development. I have also heard that ZPD was not a discovery
> > >> of Vygotsky.
> > >> > For my part, I don't see any reason why this simple idea is not
> > >> applicable
> > >> > to any learning situation. And likwise if you want to introduce
> > >> the concept
> > >> > of "development" into qualitative achievements in the lytical
> > >> phase of
> > >> > development under the heading of "microgenesis" to distinguish
> > >> it from the
> > >> > whole process of growing into an adult citizen through a series
> > >> of distinct
> > >> > social roles, I see no problem with this. ... Only provided we
> > >> understand
> > >> > that if a child soldier who learns one day how to torture a
> > >> prisoner, which
> > >> > they were formerly reluctant to do, this is "development" in a
> > >> different
> > >> > sense, because it creates only a barrier to becoming a citizen
> of
> > a
> > >> > community governed by democratic norms. But it would remain
> > >> "microgenesis"
> > >> > if considered in cultural isolation. What makes every step along
> > >> the road
> > >> > of learning to read in countries like ours /development/ is that
> > >> (as you
> > >> > discussed with the kids) being able to read is a /sine qua non/
> > >> of being a
> > >> > grown up in our world. Torturing your peers is not.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > In your message of almost 24 hours ago you said:
> > >> >
> > >> > "If what you write is correct, what does the word DEVELOPMENT
> mean
> > >> > in the concept of a zone of proximal DEVELOPMENT? ... classroom
> > >> >
> > >> > lessons are clusters of events that take place in microgenetic
> > time
> > >> > WITHIN ontogenetic lythic periods.Where does that leave us?"
> > >> >
> > >> > I am perfectly prepared to live with a lot of polysemy with a
> > >> word like
> > >> > "development" when one moves from context to context. Provided
> > >> only we
> > >> > don't claim that there is /no qualitative distinction/ between
> > >> the little
> > >> > developments that add up to development during a lytic phase,
> > >> and the
> > >> > change in social position of a child which is constituted by
> > >> successful
> > >> > completion of both lytic and critical phases of development. In
> > >> that sense
> > >> > there is development and development. If that is how you are
> > >> deploying the
> > >> > word "microgenesis," then fine. I just don't see any real
> > >> disagreement.
> > >> >
> > >> > Andy
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > mike cole wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Hi Andy--
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I made it home through a ton of LA traffic alive, which,
> > >> microgenetically
> > >> >> feels good whatever the larger significance.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> When you write "I personally regard it as a matter or "mere
> > words"
> > >> >> whether "child X at last managing to recognize the difference
> > >> between d
> > >> >> and b today," for example, is described as a development" it is
> > >> clear that
> > >> >> you and I are not close enough to the same topic for me to know
> > >> how to make
> > >> >> progress.
> > >> >> It also appears that no more than four of the some 700 people
> > >> on xmca
> > >> >> give a damn about this topic, so lets go offline about it,
> > >> cc'ing Greg,
> > >> >> and David,
> > >> >> if he has patience to hang with us.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> mike
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Andy Blunden
> > >> <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net> <mailto:
> > >> >> ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Yeah, whoever translated Vygotsky's "Problem of Age" is
> > >> >> responsible. It just means /gradual/. So in a process of
> > >> >>
> > >> >> development, you have alternating critical and lytical phases,
> as
> > >> >> in stepwise processes.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Andy
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Greg Thompson wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> Apologies for the intrusion, but I had a quick point of
> > >> >>> clarification, for the uninitiated, what is meant by "lytic"?
> > >> >>> (all I could come up with pertained to "lysis" or the breaking
> > >> >>> down of cells - which would seem to suggest a different sense
> of
> > >> >>> "development" - a breaking down so that things can be
> > >> >>> reintegrated. Is that the idea?).
> > >> >>> -greg
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Andy Blunden
> > >> <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > >> >>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I don't know where Americans being dolts comes into it, Mike.
> > >> >>> Some of my best friends are Americans. :) But let's move on
> > >> >>> from that.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The point, as I see it, is trying to extract from what we can
> > >> >>> reaonsably understand Vygotsky to be saying, something which
> > >> >>> we believe could be correct and significant. To do this I
> > >> >>> think we have to understand the concept of "development"
> > >> >>> always in a particular context. A truism for anyone here I
> > >> >>> think. What it means to me is that I cannot just ask: what
> > >> >>> transformations in psychological functioning constitutes
> > >> >>> "development"? The necessary, relevant context is what role
> > >> >>> in what cultural and historical community is the person to
> > >> >>> play, in the short term and in the longer term. So the
> > >> >>> question of what constitutes development is age-specific,
> > >> >>> culturally specific and future-oriented.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> (Of course, the world changes, and what was development
> > >> >>> yesterday may become oppressive and detestable tomorrow and
> > >> >>> vice versa, but let's abstract from cultural and historical
> > >> >>> change for the moment.)
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> >From the standpoint of natural science what I have posed is
> > >> >>> an absurdity and incompatible with basic tenets of science
> > >> >>> ... because I have made development dependent on events and
> > >> >>> relations in the future. In my opinion, that is just as it
> > >> >>> should be: kids go to school "for a purpose" - although what
> > >> >>> we mean by "purpose" in this context (the child's? the
> > >> >>> parents'? the state's? in retrospect? under advice?
> > >> >>> sponatneous?). But again, let's just put the problems arising
> > >> >>> from the idea of human actions being part of object-oriented
> > >> >>> activities to the side for the moment.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> So you ask: "what does the word DEVELOPMENT mean in the
> > >> >>> concept of a zone of proximal DEVELOPMENT?"
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I have to ask /which/ zone of proximal development, which
> > >> >>> crisis or lytic period are we talking about. Now I guess we
> > >> >>> can manage to give a general answer to the question: general
> > >> >>> questions require general answers. What "development" means
> > >> >>> is relative to which ZPD you are talking about. On the other
> > >> >>> hand, the presence of the ZPD itself depends on the
> > >> >>> development being posed. Achievment of a specific new mode of
> > >> >>> action with those around you, transforming your relations and
> > >> >>> your identity and your actions in the social situation
> > >> >>> depends on the expectations of those around you, according to
> > >> >>> broader cultural expectations and possibilities.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> A teacher or other "helper" interested in fostering
> > >> >>> development (if they can be presumed to reflect general,
> > >> >>> broader cultural expectations) has in mind what new
> > >> >>> functioning will be a necessary step towards the child
> > >> >>> becoming an autonomous citizen of the community.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> As Vygotsky insists, this poses for the child and her
> > >> >>> "helper" two different kinds of situation: either /lytical/
> > >> >>> development or /critical/ development. Lytical development is
> > >> >>> gradual and prepares the basis for developmental leap. To
> > >> >>> argue whether the gradual progress made in strengthening the
> > >> >>> relevant psychologhical functions in this phase is or is not
> > >> >>> development is in my opinion /just words/. Gradual
> > >> >>> accumulation of strength in those activities which the child
> > >> >>> is basically able to do, but maybe not very confidentally and
> > >> >>> well is a necessary preparation for transcending their
> > >> >>> age-role and entering into a phase of critical development in
> > >> >>> which they have a chance of successfully coming out the other
> > >> >>> side. It is by completion of the critical phase of
> > >> >>> development - the leap - which transforms the child's
> > >> >>> identity and role, that "/the development" is realised/. All
> > >> >>> the preparation in the world proves to be not development if
> > >> >>> it is not realised in facilitating the critical
> transformation.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> So, excuse me please for however imperfectly rehearsing
> > >> >>> egg-sucking for grandma's erudition.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I personally regard it as a matter or "mere words" whether
> > >> >>> "child X at last managing to recognise the difference
> > >> >>> between d and b today," for example, is described as a
> > >> >>> development. In the context of course it is; it is a step.
> > >> >>> You want to call that a "microgenetic development"?
> > >> >>> Personally I don't have a problem with that. David may, but
> > >> >>> paraphrasing Oscar Wilde: "Microgenesis is not one of my
> > >> >>> words." But if the child at last managed to repeat the
> > >> >>> Gospel According to St Luke by rote, and you wanted to
> > >> >>> describe this as a microgenetic development, I would want to
> > >> >>> hear the developmental plan that made that claim coherent.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Where if anywhere does this leave us?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Andy
> > >> >>> My apologies for using so many words to say so little.
> > >> >>> Just trying to be clear and careful.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> mike cole wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Hi Andy--
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Well to begin with, thanks for keeping the discussion
> > >> >>> alive. I am away from home without books or control of my
> > >> >>> time, so I want to ask a question that may highlight what
> > >> >>> is central to my queries here.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> If what you write is correct, what does the word
> > >> >>> DEVELOPMENT mean in the concept of a zone of proximal
> > >> >>> DEVELOPMENT? Its all fine and dandy to point out what
> > >> >>> dolts Americans are for not understanding that learning
> > >> >>> leads DEVELOPMENT in classroom instruction, that but
> > >> >>> classroom lessons are clusters of events that take place
> > >> >>> in microgenetic time WITHIN ontogenetic lythic periods.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Where does that leave us?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> mike
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> PS- the url below lays out in some detail where the idea
> > >> >>> of acquisition of reading as a cultural-historical
> > >> >>> developmental process. Old and never published. But at
> > >> >>> least we might refine what is indexed by the phrase
> > >> >>> "learning to read."
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/****NEWTECHN.pdf<
> > http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/**NEWTECHN.pdf>
> > >> <http://lchc.ucsd.**edu/People/NEWTECHN.pdf<
> > http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/NEWTECHN.pdf>
> > >> >
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Andy Blunden
> > >> >>> <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > >> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>
> > >> >>> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>
> > >> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>>>>
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> So this thread does not die ...
> > >> >>> You said, Mike, "So I am seeing the same solution to
> > >> >>> thinking
> > >> >>> about the ontogeny/microgenesis relationships by
> > >> >>> analogy with the
> > >> >>> phylogeny/cultural-history relation."
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I don't see the analogy there. Phylogeny and
> > >> >>> ethnogeny are two
> > >> >>> (overlapping and mutually determining) processes with
> > >> >>> two very
> > >> >>> distinct material bases, viz., genes and artefacts.
> > >> >>> But learning
> > >> >>> to read/write and development of abstract thinking
> > >> >>> (and other
> > >> >>> leading activities in a developmental ZPD) is not
> > >> >>> such a relation,
> > >> >>> it is a relation between critical phases and lytic
> > >> >>> (gradual)
> > >> >>> phases of development. This is quite a different
> > >> >>> relationship.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The analogy I would see for something which couold be
> > >> >>> called
> > >> >>> microgenesis would be the /situation/: a concept develops
> > >> >>> momentrily in a person and their actions in a
> > >> >>> situation. The
> > >> >>> situation is not a factor in phylo- or ethnogensis,
> > >> >>> it essentially
> > >> >>> belongs to the very short time scale, and its
> > >> >>> material basis is
> > >> >>> activity. I grant that no-one might use
> > >> >>> "microgenesis" in that way
> > >> >>> and no-one may be doing research into that process
> > >> >>> these days. I
> > >> >>> don't know. But the situation is a distinct material
> > >> >>> basis for
> > >> >>> development and one on which Vygotsky did a great
> > >> >>> deal of work. On
> > >> >>> the other hand, I think /all/ processes of
> > >> >>> development have both
> > >> >>> critical and lytical phases (c.f. Gould's punctuated
> > >> >>> evolution).
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> What do you think?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Andy
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> ______________________________****____________
> > >> >>> _____
> > >> >>> xmca mailing list
> > >> >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/****listinfo/xmca<
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca>
> > >> <http://dss.ucsd.**edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca<
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> > >> >
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > >> >>> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > >> >>> Department of Anthropology
> > >> >>> Brigham Young University
> > >> >>> Provo, UT 84602
> > >> >>>
> > >> http://byu.academia.edu/****GregoryThompson<
> > http://byu.academia.edu/**GregoryThompson>
> > >> <http://byu.**academia.edu/GregoryThompson<
> > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson>
> > >> >
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >> --
> > ------------------------------****----------------------------*
> > >> *--
> > >> >> **------------
> > >> >>
> > >> >> *Andy Blunden*
> > >> >> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> > >> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/**>
> > >> >> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/****<
> > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/**>
> > >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >> >>
> > >> >> ______________________________****____________
> > >> >> _____
> > >> >> xmca mailing list
> > >> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >> <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>
> > >>
> > >> >>
> > >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/****listinfo/xmca<
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca>
> > >> <http://dss.ucsd.**edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca<
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> > >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> > --
> > >> > ------------------------------****----------------------------**
> > >> --**
> > >> > ------------
> > >> >
> > >> > *Andy Blunden*
> > >> > Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> > >> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/**>
> > >>
> > >> > Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >> >
> > >> > ______________________________**____________
> > >> > _____
> > >> > xmca mailing list
> > >> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>
> > >> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> ______________________________**____________
> > >> _____
> > >> xmca mailing list
> > >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >>
> > >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > >> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > >> Department of Anthropology
> > >> Brigham Young University
> > >> Provo, UT 84602
> > >> http://byu.academia.edu/**GregoryThompson<
> > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson>
> > >>
> > >>
> > > --
> > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**
> > > ------------
> > >
> > > *Andy Blunden*
> > > Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> > > Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > >
> > > ______________________________**____________
> > > _____
> > > xmca mailing list
> > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > Department of Anthropology
> > Brigham Young University
> > Provo, UT 84602
> > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> > __________________________________________
> > _____
> > 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
>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca