well. depending on what it is, I'd be glad to split it up with all the
participating contestants.
nate, yr tale of Kurt Lewin with Vygotsky ...out from Lewin's legacy
emerges a trail of them who walked before but never got credit:
eg., (my most fav piece of trivia thee days -)
in the 1930s, Lewin visits the US hoping to suck up some with Dewey, 'cause
Dewey is hot in Europe...Lewin runs into Washington, hooks up with John
Collier, appointed as Commissioner of Indian Affairs, specifically to deal
with
racism and the conditions of the reservations.
Lewin tags along. "Watcha doin' John? Huh? Whatcha doin' now? Hey. Can I use
that? Hey. Can I quote you on that?" and Collier & Dewey worked on
developing progresive schools for Indian-americans;
and Lewin goes to England, starts messing around with social psych and
racism, then decides to implement education strategies based on his psych
theories,
and then research what happens after the info is delivered. following the
disasters of this approach the demand for protocols in
action research developed. reading Lewin is so different from reading about him.
did he author anything on his own? seems to be everything i
co-authored. literacy problems perhaps?dyslexia?
Anyway,
the implication of the message disturbs the HELL out of me:
"if you want to understand/know/be "one" with something, try to change it"
is pure invasion ideology. stuff changes. watch for it. trying to change
things we don't understand is ludicrous as a responsible practice, I don't
care who said it: it's invasion rationalization and is a bad way to think.
bad.
if you want to understand something so much that the only thing you
can do is change whatever it is, then it can't be what it "is" that is
of interest, but what kinds of effects human interventions have on stuff.
Back to the Water-Table and Sink or Float games, maybe.
diane -
(I just let loose a tirade elsewhere and seem to have
slipped some of it in here - no hard feelings 'dere now, youse are all da
good guyz'n'galz, ya?
suure ye be. I know dat...