:)
It has been a pleasure - and a learning process - to interact with your ideas mediated by xmca.
Thanks for reply.
-----Mensagem original-----
De: MnFamilyMan@aol.com <MnFamilyMan@aol.com>
Para: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Data: Domingo, 14 de Abril de 2002 14:46
Assunto: Re: Sawyer's sociocultural analysis
In a message dated 4/13/2002 11:56:40 PM Central Daylight Time, rjapias@uol.com.br writes:
I did not remmember to have seen any reference of KS on this four levels along his article (e-article)
And also that: "Sawyer's notion of dual analysis" is very close to "LSV's 'functional method of double stimulation' experimental methodology".
I, personally, think they are talking about different things - or better, diferent methods of approaching phenomena.
In that I will ever discuss specific notions of an author is unlikely because of the inevitable 'white noise' my life brings to it, so specificity as to Sawyer's opinion is solely left to him. My comment was speaking more to a duality that is dependent and independent at the same time. For instance: my thinking on sociocultural theory has been a phenomenon for me regardless of Sawyer and now because Sawyer has written an article that I have read I still have my independent sociocultural theories but they are inevitably going to be linked in a dependent independence to Sawyer as well as the other theorists I depended upon [LSV, Valsiner, Cole, etc.] for the formation of my own independent views. Yes, you are correct in surmising that Sawyer's perception of dual analysis is distinct from LSV's MDS but in MHO the social phenomenon is a priori similar.
Rhetorical question #101: Is any of this making sense?
eric
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 08 2002 - 12:53:46 PDT