Naoki, Can I assume that you would accommodate individual human subjects
in an AT account, if it would serve the purposes of an interavention?
Surely you are NOT proposing that from the AT perspective,
we ought not to focus on individual subjects...? - Because
if a model of the system is to feed back into the system, it would
have to do so by way of individuals....
I don't like the terms of cognitive psychology either, but I am
reluctant to accept the purity of ANY model, because it has to operate in
messy material practices. There may well be good reasons to articulate
AT in terms that can be understood by participants who think as COGs
(in terms of cognitive psychology).
Judy
, in activity theory,
>subject, object, and tool are not the fixted lavels or categories for
>something that has some specific attributes.
>Depending on situation, depending on perspective or a way of
>participation, what is subject, object, or tool is different and
>changing, and reorganizing
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 19:32:48
>To: xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu
>From: Judy Diamondstone <diamonju who-is-at rci.rutgers.edu>
>Subject: Re: non-fixed objects (Re: Unidentified subject)
>
>Naoki ; Eva -- can you say more about how motive in AT
>is different from motivation?
>From an individual subject's perspective (and I'd argue that
>we have to slot individuals/individual alliances into subject
>position, if we want to understand anything at all about
>a collective, institutional subject) - the object is what
>motivates. The object confers identity in some respect....
>
>What do you think?
>
>
>
>At 10:15 PM 5/20/98 +0200, you wrote:
>>At 01.15 +0900 98-05-21, Naoki Ueno wrote:
>>>According to my understanding, in activity theory,
>>>subject, object, and tool are not the fixted lavels or categories for
>>>something that has some specific attributes.
>>>Depending on situation, depending on perspective or a way of
>>>participation, what is subject, object, or tool is different and
>>>changing, and reorganizing.
>>>
>>>Further, the meaning of motive in AT is quite different from motivation,
>>>intention and something like in traditional psychology.
>>
>>These are my understandings, too -- although as understandings they are in
>>all likelihood of a much more recent date than Naoki Ueno's.
>>
>>Eva
>>eva.ekeblad who-is-at ped.gu.se
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Judith Diamondstone (732) 932-7496 Ext. 352
Graduate School of Education
Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey
10 Seminary Place
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1183