on personality: the "knot" of relationships among ideas of Marx, Peirce,
and Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (who hung out with Peirce in Boston) may be
suggested in this exerpt from an email conversation between me and Eugene:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Whitson [mailto:twhitson@UDel.Edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 2:35 PM
> Eugene notes: "Marx defined an individual as an assembly (a "knot") of
> all social relations the individual is involved."
> >From a radically different philosophical standpoint, Oliver Wendell
> Holmes, Jr. wrote:
> "(P)ersonality is an illusion only to be accepted on weekdays for
> working purposes. We are cosmic ganglia; so I believe as much as I
> believe anything. And personality is merely the gaslight at the
> crossroads with an accidentally larger or smaller radius of
> (Quoted with secondary source citation at fn. 61 of "JUSTICE SCALIA
> YOGI BERRA: A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION,"
> http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/newnino.htm )
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Mike Cole wrote:
> Odd what sparks discussion here.
> I have also been reading Valsiner and will go back to it through this lens.
> I found the following statement odd.
> The two [Stern-individualism and Vygosk] are brought together in
> Valsiner's theory, which highlights the sign-constructing and
> sign-using nature of all distinctively human psychological processes.
> Arguing that the individualistic and the cultural traditions differ
> largely in emphasis, Valsiner unites them by focusing on the intricate
> relations between personality and its social context, and their
> interplay in personality development.
> If the personality is the highest form of sociality, the unit of
> analysis for understanding the "whole person," what does it mean to
> talk about relationships BETWEEN the personality
> and its social context? Is context outside and personality inside? Really?
> On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 14:38:27 +0100, George <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Dear Phil,
>> I do not have Engeström's et al. book. Would you happen to have an
>> electronic copy of Davydov's article? or know a link - although I
>> searched an could not find anything?
>> On Feb 13, 2005, at 12:53 PM, Phil Chappell wrote:
>>> Davydov's essay: Davydov, V.V. (1999) The content and unsolved
>>> problems of activity theory, in Engestrom, Y, Miettinen, R and
>>> Punamaki, R-L "Perspectives on Activity Theory" Cambridge University
>> Best regards,
>> (Hansjoerg von Brevern)
>> Research in e-Learning Objects, e-Learning meta data standards,
>> didactical activity, Systemic-Structural Activity Theory, and
>> Socio-cultural Theory
UD School of Education
NEWARK DE 19716
"those who fail to reread
are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
-- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 01 2005 - 01:00:04 PST