Hi Paul,
I appreciate many points in your message. It is not just about me and you. I hope I have made clear that it is also about Judy, Eva, Diane, Jay, and Mike, and there are others who will not post publically on xmca (I count 4) who have sent me email privately, and Kathie, who has joined this conversation too.
What I intend is not an inquisition, not an adversarial trial, not a crusade, and not a lynching. It is not about getting you kicked off xmca. It surely is about changing our interactions.
It is not a crusade, but I am standing my ground. Why? Engeströms 1996 call for third generation activity theory seems best applied here. It is because there are contradictions here, deep ones, that should not be buried by the system. This is not a soap opera. This is where the rubber meets the road. This is a chance to see if Il'enkov's practical idea of "internal contradictions as the driving force of change and development in activity systems" (Engeström) really does work. Perhaps one contradiction is our conflicting notions of what constitutes discussion, and I think you expanded well what your guidelines are. Mine are probably closer to those found in the book "All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten". It has not always been that way, but I have found that I get higher quality interactions with people, greatly improved content, when I stick to Fulghum's guidelines.
Of course it is also about me and you. In thinking of our situation, especially in communicating with you, I must also determinedly regulate my self. It's that feeling in my stomach, my adrenaline rising, when I see that you have written something on the same thread, and that I am compelled to read, and perhaps compelled to respond. The adrenaline is not from excitement, it is not from the anticipation of reading something insightful. Rather, I find myself asking: Can I match what aggression may come "in the heat of a discussion" with a response that is respectful of you as a human being? But then is anything that important to say, within the purview of xmca, that must criticize strongly and thus constitute a heated discussion? What I'd like to share with you, is that the feeling I get neither fosters my respect for your knowledge of dialectical materialism, nor does it increase my interest in dialectical materialism. It does just the opposite. You may find knowledge, but you lose my interest.
It is also about other xmca'ers. Kathie admits censoring herself. Another xcma'er is filtering his messages that have your email address. A third is trashing her xmca mail. A fourth tells me he has been warned of you. Eva has simply stopped posting. Surely that is not the effect you'd like to have on people. Surely chasing discussants away cannot cultivate theoretical discussions.
It is not about my theoretical position. I don't have one. When I read Engeström, I get pretty damned excited about dialectics in activity theory. But I also read Alfred Lang, Michael Cole, Jay Lemke, Leont'ev, Vygotsky, Luria, Barker, Lave, John-Steiner, Goncu, Bronfenbrenner, Miettinen, Davydov, Wertsch, Latour, Frieir, Goodman, Hedegaard, Wells, and others, who not only have made great theoretical contributions, but among those are many who have also made great experimental studies and observations. As one who is in the field, a practitioner attempting to use theory to guide intervention in complex situations, I must disagree with Leont'ev, and be eclectic. Otherwise it would be as if asking the auto mechanic to work on cars using only one tool. Imagine trying to remove spark plugs using only a screwdriver.
Engeström, Y. (1996) Development work research as educational research. Nordisk Pegagogik, vol 16, n3, p131.
Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
Lesley University (Effective September 5, 2000)
29 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790
Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Barowy.html
_______________________
"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 01 2000 - 01:00:55 PDT