Re: [xmca] Educational neuroscience

[Haydi Zulfei <haydizulfei@rocketmail.com>]

Andy ! To what you've explicated , I'd like to add paragraphs from the 'first book' again ; one could find relationships especially when we read the details Luria give us in each case but one big question remains : the difference between a method of paramedicals (religious , Buddhistic , intervention of high spirits as described by Vygotsky when discussing James-Long Theory , etc.) and a method of scientific procurement as well as piercing into the gaps which are being gradually filled by a process of Scientific Development :

[[The acute state of the
trauma, complicated by
the
necessity
of
concealing it,
bound in
by
the fear of
expressing itself,
creates
in the criminal a state of
exceedingly
acute affective
tension;
this tension is
very probably exaggerated
because the
subject
is under the fear of
disclosing
his
crime;
the more serious the
crime,
the more marked the
affect,
and the
greater
the
danger
of
disclosing it,
the more this
complex
is
suppressed,
and we
have
already
seen what a remarkable destruction of the most
important neurodynamical
functions characterises the behaviour
of the criminal.]]

...

That the state of the criminal in whom the tension cannot
find exit
anywhere may
become
actually
insufferable is beautifully
illustrated in the
pages
of
great literary productions.
The
suppression
of the
complexes
is here
truly insufferable,
and the
subject experiencing
them is
certainly
not in a condition
to remain
passive during
the course of this
affect;
he must
orient himself in such a
way
that he
discharge
the tension and
save himself from an external
play
of
excitation,
which
upsets
all of his behavour and
keeps
him
incessantly
under the fear
of detection.
Such a tension is
undoubtedly
one of the most serious factors
for the criminal in the
recognition
of his
guilt. By
confession
the criminal has the means to avoid the affective
traces,
to find
an exit for the
tension,
to
discharge
that affective tonus which
created within him an unbearable conflict. Confession can eliminate this conflict and restore the
personality
in a certain
degree
to a normal
state,
and this is its
psychophysiological significance.
The
psychophysiological
role of confession has been evaluated
for a
long time;
the ancient
teaching concerning
catharsis con-

sidered confession in offences an
expiation; Christianity
in its
use of confession
always employed
this
psychological principle
of
alleviation,
and
brought
about avoidance of the affective
traces
by having
the
subject
relate the sins
troubling
him to an
official of the church
; finally,
all
psychotherapy,
and
especially
every therapeutic system
of
psychoanalysis proceeds
from this
principle,
which is connected with the transfer of the
complexes
and a relief of the tension in the consciousness. This
principle,
so well established in the various
therapeutic processes,
is
directly
connected with the
powerful process
of elimination of the affective
complexes;
and
precisely
this is the
specific
value of the
therapeutic
effect of
psychoanalysis.
In the situation of
crime,
we
may expect
the influence of
such avoidance in
especially
marked forms. Admission of
guilt
removes from the criminal those restraints which controlled each
of his
steps
and
every
one of his
thoughts
and created an exceedingly
acute conflict of
very
marked tension
;
thus confession
is a
path
to the relief of affect and to the reestablishment of a
more normal functional life.
From the
psychophysiological investigation
of crime and confession,
we
may expect, consequently,
extreme
changes
in the
behaviour
compared
to what it was before
confession,
the removal of acute
symptoms
of affective traces connected with the
crime, and, finally,
the removal of the
suppressed complex
striving
to
express
itself in some
activity,
the control of which is
weakened. On the
contrary,
the confession should
give
us a
psychophysiological picture
of
discharge, ventilation, and,
connected with
this,
a certain calmness of the behaviour. The experiments
on the
psychophysiology
of confession arouse in
us,
then,
a
deep
theoretical interest.]]

Now it's high time to go so far as to compare these highly-evaluated content of a very raw kind of 'perezhivanie' with the content of Vasiluk's book of 'perezhivanie' (experiencing + ...) and the very nice content of a very short paragraph Greg so diligently presented to us from the same author in time .
Best
Haydi


________________________________
 From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
To: "Hansen, Monica" <monica.hansen@vandals.uidaho.edu> 
Cc: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> 
Sent: Sunday, 28 July 2013, 6:11:28
Subject: Re: [xmca] Educational neuroscience
 


Of course wherever trauma or injury to the brain is involved, knowledge 

of the localisation of functions is important for giodng therapy, and 

also, as Martin notes, neurpscience has functioned to debunk various 

simplistic assumptions about how the brain works, and in fact greatly 

complicates imagination of even simple thought processes, but here is 

what I think about the central point.


Freud had a diagram of the "mental personality". (see 

http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/at/freud2.htm 

for example). He did not claim that this corresponded to the forms to 

any actual biological structure inside the skull. But it was an image 

around which therapeutical activities and knowledge of psychoanalysis 

could be organised. The diagram functioned as a mediating artefact, in 

other words. Likewise, religious people use the Bible as a mediating 

artefact around which to organise pastoral counselling, prayer and 

generally managing their own lives. That the Bible may function quite 

effectively in this respect does not depend on the claim that it is the 

word of God, even if some of those who use it staunchly believe it to be 

the case.


Now in our naturalistic times, we insist that the mediating artifact 

(such as a map of the brain) around which we organise psychotherapy, 

education and so on, *is* a representation of a real, material organism. 

And of course, it is. But if you think about it, it would not matter at 

all if it were not. For example, teaching by rote, something which has 

thousands of years of history, can now be "rationalised" by "brain 

plasticity," but obviously it is its efficacy in social practice which 

is the final critierion of its success. (By the way, "brain plasticity" 

was known to physiotherapists for half a century, at least, before 

neurosurgeons coined the term. They had never bothered to enquire what 

the "nurses" were doing with their patients once they left the operaitng 

theatre, and were surprised to discover that people were being cured of 

their injury by paramedicals.)


Andy


Hansen, Monica wrote:

> Hi, Andy, and others. Interesting discussion. Some good sources. One consideration:

>

> Pharmaceutical implications are NOT the only result of understanding the contribution of neuroscience in education! Although I have seen neuroscientists include this in their discussion (especially for dyslexia and adhd).

>

> One implication of neuroscience for teachers in the classroom with individual students is a greater understanding of normal, individual variation for complex functions like reading and writing. In working to understand neuroanatomy of meaningful language, one finds that current research supports more structures being involved rather than identifying one localized region for speech production.  Rather than considering development as predetermined, development is considered ongoing. The social and cultural influence in an individual's cortical organization is huge! Current neuroscience supports what Bella Kotik-Friedgut refers to from Luria as "extracortical" organization, the notion that the cortex is reorganized from without the individual. Development of the brain is not predetermined for our students just because of genetics. What we become and are is not reduced to chemicals, is not a function of time(maturity) in the mechanistic sense, but arises
 from the ability of our nervous systems as dynamic, growing and changing within larger systems.

>

> Monica Hansen

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden

> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 9:00 AM

> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity

> Subject: Re: [xmca] Educational neuroscience

>

> I would like to suggest a thought experiment.

> Suppose that neuroscience had progressed to a point where every psychological phenomenon has been traced to a specific formation in the brain. (This is of course very far from the case. Even dramatic psychological disorders are often invisible to neuroscience, but just suppose. ....)

>

> What then?

>

> It could help faciitate new pharamceutical and surgical cures for psychological disorders.

> So instead of better teaching, we could administer drugs to children so they learn faster, or something??

> It is only surgical and pharmceutical interventions that require neuroscientific knowledge. Oherwise, stories about the brain just function as rationalisations, for doing things which can be explained and tested without reference to the brain,

>

> Andy

>

> Huw Lloyd wrote:

>  

>> On 24 July 2013 16:45, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:

>>

>>  

>>    

>>> On 24 July 2013 16:35, Wagner Luiz Schmit <wagner.schmit@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>    

>>>      

>>>> Huw,

>>>>

>>>> Thanks for the indications. Any "recent" (10 years or so)  research

>>>> dealing with the data made available by the knew scan technologies?

>>>>

>>>> Best,

>>>>

>>>> Wagner

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>> Nothing that I've come across.  I haven't expected to find anything

>>> though, so haven't looked with any diligence.

>>>

>>> Christine had some thoughts on biological developments a while back.

>>>

>>> *ANY* studies on genetic process are of merit here, I believe. it doesn't

>>> have to be the brain.  Note that this is looking at "natural phenomena"

>>> rather than artificial phenomena alone.

>>>

>>> Best,

>>> Huw

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>    

>>>      

>> Dynamic Systems Theory may be worth exploring -- I haven't looked yet.

>>

>> Travieso, Ch. 6, The Cambridge Handbook of Socialcultural Psychology, (Eds)

>> Valsiner & Rosa.

>>

>> Best,

>> Huw

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>  

>>    

>>>  On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>

>>>    

>>>      

>>>> wrote:

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>> On 24 July 2013 16:23, Wagner Luiz Schmit <wagner.schmit@gmail.com>

>>>>>        

>>>>>          

>>>> wrote:

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>> Thanks Ulvi,

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Any work you recommend for beginner's and or a must have/read in the

>>>>>> library?

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I am trying to get a broader sense of human development using Vygotsky

>>>>>> as core and searching for recent readings in different fields like

>>>>>> Philosophy (Ilyenkov) and History (People's history of the world by

>>>>>> Chris Harman), But still lacking a clue on "phylogeny" and

>>>>>> neuroscience.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>> Wertsch, Vygotsky and the formation of mind -- genetic domains.

>>>>> Waddington, Genetic Assimilation.

>>>>> Batson, genetic/ecological processes.

>>>>>

>>>>> The recent documents from Luria cover some "basics" which are typically

>>>>> missed in this line of research.  Luria's research is predominantly

>>>>> functional (of a v. high calibre).  It seems to be dialectic in an

>>>>>        

>>>>>          

>>>> Engels

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>> kind of way.  But the functional explanations stand up for themselves.

>>>>>

>>>>> Best,

>>>>> Huw

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>        

>>>>>          

>>>>>> Wagner

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com>

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>> wrote:

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>> As far as I know, there is a strong neuroscience in Russia in the

>>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>              

>>>> line of

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>> Alexander Romanovitch's work, Homskaya and his many other students

>>>>>>> continued his work a lot.

>>>>>>> Ulvi

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> 2013/7/24 Wagner Luiz Schmit <wagner.schmit@gmail.com>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>> Hello Huw,

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> I like that text pretty much (I always returned to it in our

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>> research

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>> group in Brazil and I will present it again this week to our

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>> research

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>> group in Japan). And this text, acording to Leontiev, is from

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>> 1930...

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>> But at the same time Leontiev, in a letter from this same year (if I

>>>>>>>> am not mistaken again) points to divergent way of thinking between

>>>>>>>> him, Luria and Vygotsky... I unfortunately know very little about

>>>>>>>> Luria (just read some texts) and even less about today Russian

>>>>>>>> neuroscience, does this proposal by Vygotsky continues in Luria? And

>>>>>>>> returning to the main topic, there is still neuroscience following

>>>>>>>> these guidelines?

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Wagner

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Huw Lloyd <

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>> huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>> On 24 July 2013 15:38, Wagner Luiz Schmit <

>>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>> wagner.schmit@gmail.com>

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>> Hello Larry,

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Please say more... I think this is so important, and things

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>> point out

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>>>> that Vygotsky also, otherwise why enter the Medicine course in

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>> 1930

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>>>> (if my memory is not wrong)

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Wagner

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>> "On Psychological Systems", collected works of LSV, v.3, p.105

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "In actual fact, it seems to me that by introducing the concept of

>>>>>>>>> psychological system in the form we discussed, we get a splendid

>>>>>>>>> possibility of conceiving the real connections, the real complex

>>>>>>>>> relationships that exist."

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "To a certain degree this also holds true for one of the most

>>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>> difficult

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>>> problems -- the localization of higher psychological systems."

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Huw

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Larry Purss <

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>> lpscholar2@gmail.com>

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>> Ulvi,

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> You mentioned you are interested in *cognitive CHANGE*.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Within the concept  *neuroplasticity* is implicit Nero change.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> There is a scholar in France [Catherine Malabou] whose central

>>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>> conceptual

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>>> thesis explores *plasticity* as from the Greek *to mold  or to

>>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>> model.*

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>>>>> She moves the concepts of *dynamic* and *systems* and *theory*

>>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>> and

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>>>> *neural*

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>> within the orbit of the central thesis of plasticity as change,

>>>>>>>>>>> transformation and metamorphosis.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Not sure if this is too far off topic.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> I also want to mention *neo-Piagetian* theory including

>>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>> Vygotsky

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>> and

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>>>>> Wittgenstein is being explored at SIMON Fraser University.

>>>>>>>>>>> If interested I could say more.

>>>>>>>>>>> Larry

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:39 AM, Ulvi İçil <

>>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>> ulvi.icil@gmail.com>

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Andy and all, I found Kurt Fisher, he is at Harvard,

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>> Mind,

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>> Brain

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>> Education.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> He is described as:

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Piagetian_theories_of_cognitive_development

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>>>>>> Fischer's theory differs from the other neo-Piagetian

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>> theories in

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>> a

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>>>> number

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>> of respects. One of them is in the way it explains cognitive

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>> change.

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>>>>>> Specifically, although Fischer does not deny the operation of

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>> information

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>> processing constrains on development, he emphasizes on the

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>> environmental

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>>>> and social rather than individual factors as causes of

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>> development.

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>> To

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>>>> explain developmental change he borrowed two classic notions

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>> from

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>> Lev

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>>>>>> Vygotsky,[12]<

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Piagetian_theories_of_cognitive_development#cite_note-12

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>>>>>>> that

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>>>>>>>> is, internalization and the zone of proximal development.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> I am rather interested in the application of the new findings

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>> in

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>> the

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>>>> field

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>> of educational neuroscience into the theory and practice of

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>> education.

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>>>> Ulvi

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/23 Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ulvi, best of luck in your search, and maybe someone on this

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>> list

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>> can

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>>>>> help. But don't get your hopes up.

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lawrence Barsalou is a very sophisticated writer on

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>> neuroscience,

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>> but

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>> in:

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Barsalou, L. W. (1992) “Cognitive Psychology. An Overview

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>> for

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>>>> Cognitive

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientists,” Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> where he has a chapter on education, he characterises

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>> education

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>> as:

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>>>>>>> “teachers provide information that students incorporate into

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>>>> existing

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge” - in other words, not only does he use "folk

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>>>> psychology" in

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>>>> his

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>> grasp of the subtlties of education, but he seems to be

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>> unaware

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>> that

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>> this

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>>> antiquated "theory" of teaching and learning has been

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>> subject to

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>> any

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>>>>> critique over the past 100 years. A classic illustration of

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>> the

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>>>> problem

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Greg has been raising.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ulvi İçil wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to know some outstanding scholar names in the

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                            

>>>>>> field

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>>>>> of

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> educational neuroscience, working in the line of

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                            

>>>> sociocultural

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>>>> theory.

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ulvi

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                            

>>>>>>>>>>>>> --

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------

>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden*

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts

>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://marxists.academia.edu/**AndyBlunden<

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>>>>>>>> http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden>

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>>>>                          

>>>>>>>>>>>>                      

>>>>>>>>>>>>                        

>>>>>>>>>>                  

>>>>>>>>>>                    

>>>>>>>>              

>>>>>>>>                

>>>>>>          

>>>>>>            

>>>>      

>>>>        

>>

>>  

>>    

>

>  


-- 

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Andy Blunden*

Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/

Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts

http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden