mike,
I totally agree with this thought:
> Whatever it is, it has to be accessible
I think one of the factors favoring the Leont'ev discussion was the
accessibility to the text which might not have become otherwise accessible
for many. That and the fact that the ideas therein contained have exerted a
strong influence on AT. In short, it is something of a "classic" work
(although some might argue that Problems in the Development of Mind is more
significant). These factors: accessibility, classic and formative stature,
and perhaps, its relative shortness (compared for example to Problems)
accounted for the dynamic and durable quality of the discussion. Of course
one cannot leave out of account the quality of the contributors and the time
they gave to reading the work, each other's posts, and writing their
analyses and thoughts.
I too think a variety of approaches is best for the purposes of xmca, but
you must be somewhat gladdened that an entire major work was finally read
and discussed. Given the time it takes perhaps once a year would be about
right.
Paul H. Dillon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 27 2004 - 11:29:00 PST