[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment and then some



Dear Eric,

 

I sympathise with your predicament. In any case, don't give up. Who knows,
maybe the way you struggle with the cultural context you are forced to work
in and the way this struggle manifests itself in your dedication towards
your students is already dialectics.

 

Good luck!

 

Michael

 

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
Behalf Of ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 6:03 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment and then some

 

 

Michael:

 

Thank you for your comments, they do help in understanding the 

conceptualization of the zpd.  However, I do believe you have 

misinterpreted my comments by believing I am looking for a bottom-up 

methodology.

 

Please understand I am forced to work in the cultural aspect of my 

environment as well (a bottoms up, scope and sequence methodology of the 

american special education classroom) this by no means should imply that 

it is my preferred methodology.  I have to deal with the reality of 

functionally illiterate 18 year olds.  I have to be assessed by my 

superiors in a setting that is familiar to them, not neccesarily effective 

for instruction.  Theoretically the dialectic is sound, realistically; at 

this point in time, it is as if measuring the wishes in one's hand.

 

eric

 

 

 

 

"michael" <mglevykh@telus.net>

Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu

06/08/2009 02:29 PM

Please respond to "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"

 

 

        To:     "'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>

        cc: 

        Subject:        RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment and then some

 

 

Dear Eric,

 

I recall a clip from the movie "Fiddler on the Roof." A local postman 

brings

a recent newspaper to a group of Jews in a small village called Anatevka 

(in

tsarist Russia) and, as he puts the paper in front of everybody, he tells

them: "Look, look!" The villagers gather around and stare at the paper for 

a

moment and then one of them says: "So, we all see it. But what does it 

say?"

What is important for me (not necessarily the only thing) in this episode 

is

that there are 3 aspects: (1) the villagers knew that they couldn't read;

(2) they had someone else who could read for them; and (3) they knew they

could trust that person who could read the newspaper, that he would read

without adding and/or changing the originally intended meaning.

 

Learning how to read is not always an easy task, is it? Re-Learning,

however, is even more difficult. In fact, Vygotsky states: "It is easier 

to

adopt a thousand new facts in any field than to adopt a new point of view 

of

a few already known facts" (Vygotsky, 1985, pp. 6-7, my translation). Now,

if you could imagine some researchers (educational and others) who are

simply not aware that they do not know "how to read" (so to speak), they 

are

not aware that they don't know the language of, let's say, cultural

development. They are, however, trying very hard to "see" what is going 

on;

let's say, in the classroom, they collect the data on everything they see

and hear (e.g., the teachers' discourse, the students' discourse, the

interaction between these two [or more], the immediate context, the 

visible

results, etc.). But it might not give them a complete dynamic picture of 

the

child's cultural development. And we know - what Chaiklin is trying to

assert - that the Zone of Proximal Development is not about a mere

acquisition of new information, skills, and/or behaviour in general, but

about the cultural development, about internalization (unfortunately,

Chaiklin does not differentiate, as Vygotsky does, between mere 

acquisition

and internalization), about.etc, etc, etc. That is why it is quite 

difficult

(if not impossible) to attempt to understand the concept of zpd only 

through

a "bottom up" methodology; in which situation, in the best scenario, one

might simply end up saying the same thing as those villagers: "So, we all

see it. But what does it say?" And this is why I (along with Paula, Carol,

and, I am sure, others) suggested to you to clarify (for yourself) what

cultural development entails in your interpretation of Vygotsky's writings

and the writings about Vygotsky before embarking on dissecting Vygotsky's

notion of the zpd in a practical setting. Otherwise, we all will be 

speaking

in "different" (English) languages. 

 

Best,

Michael

 

-----Original Message-----

From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On

Behalf Of Paula M Towsey

Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 8:38 AM

To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'

Subject: RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment and then some

 

 

Dear Eric

 

I think I wouldn't be alone in saying that these three questions of yours

are humdingers which would probably involve a whole host of investigations

and analyses to begin to answer.  Eric, I do promise I will give them

thought - but in the meanwhile I look forward to learning more about this

from those XMCAers who have given the matter more learned consideration 

than

I.

 

Best

Paula

 

-----Original Message-----

From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On

Behalf Of ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org

Sent: 08 June 2009 05:25 PM

To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity

Subject: RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment

 

Paula:

 

The "intricate dialectic between scientific and spontaneous concepts" is 

extremely important.  Vygotsky mentions plotting the zpd but I am at a 

loss to understand what specifically he intends to plot.  When Catherine 

mentions there is no curve this of course is counterintuitive to 

understanding systematic observations.

 

What are your thoughts on plotting utterances and false starts during d/s 

experiments?

What are your thoughts on Vygotsky's belief that learning and instruction 

have separate measurements?

Could this notion of separate measurements lead to a curve in the plots?

Thank you for your comments, they are greatly appreciated.

 

eric

 

 

 

 

"Paula M Towsey" <paulat@johnwtowsey.co.za>

Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu

06/08/2009 09:32 AM

Please respond to "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"

 

 

        To:     "'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>

        cc: 

        Subject:        RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment

 

 

Dear Eric

 

I think it would be harder to view a zone of proximal development as 

forming

a basis of some sorts stemming from the blocks experiment (as an example 

of

a method of double stimulation) than it would be in the intricate 

dialectic

between "scientific" and "spontaneous" concepts.  Although it is true that

the way in which participants in my study related to - or were able to

benefit from - the dual stimulation offered in the blocks experiment

(embodied in words and objects of the task), the blocks method appears

explicitly as an activity geared to show us what children's

meaning-making/thought processes would look like without historical,

socio-cultural guidance. Some of this - school-like discourse, geometric

shapes and colours, lettering, and so on notwithstanding - has to do with

generalisations and hierarchy. 

 

What do generalisations and hierarchy have to do with a zpd, one may ask.

Please forgive me if it looks like I'm cutting and pasting quotations, but

the two examples I give here are very important observations about the

difference between how adults form concepts and how children do.

 

"Only under experimental conditions was the child, freed from the 

directing

influences of well-established verbal connections, able to develop word

meanings and to form complex [ie, complexive] generalizations according to

his own preferences.  This fact shows us the importance of experimental

study, which alone can reveal the spontaneous [not to be conflated with

"everyday" as in everyday concepts] activity of the child in mastering the

language of adults. Experimental study shows us what the child's language

and concept formation would look like if they were freed from the 

directing

influence of the linguistic milieu." (Kozulin's T&L, 1986, p.120)

Minick puts it this way:

"It is only in the experiment that we free the child from the directing

influence of the words of adult language with their developed and stable

meanings.  It is only here that we allow the child to develop word 

meanings

and create complexive generalizations in accordance with his own free

judgment.  The experiment is of tremendous significance in this sense.  It

allows us to discover how the child's own activity in manifested in 

learning

adult language.  The experiment indicates what the child's language would 

be

like and the nature of the generalizations that would direct his thinking 

if

its development were not directed by an adult language that effectively

predetermines the range of concrete objects to which a given word meaning

can be extended."

(Minick's T&S, 1987, p.143)

 

Words are supplied in the blocks experiment (they are written underneath 

the

blocks) but it is up to the participants to work out what the words mean 

in

the process of solving the problem of the blocks.  Also, the adults in the

experiment don't provide a context for word meanings (as they would in "In

summer the ice lollies melt because it is very hot") - so it's more like a

dictionary entry and then you don't understand the words used to explain 

to

explain the first one and you still have to work it out for yourself. This

aspect is an intentional design in the blocks study, even though the 

method

didn't manage to shed light on the way in which generalisations and

hierarchically abstracted characteristics are built upon in forming "true"

or "real" concepts (LSV's self acknowledged awareness of the "limitations"

of the blocks).

 

Generalizations and hierarchies of abstracted characteristics are both

necessary in the formation of "scientific" concepts, and this form of

thinking can most easily seen in schooling environments most days of the

week.  In this case, explanations of words like "brother" and 

"hibernation"

would probably show a more clearly tangible picture of the thinking 

involved

in how these concepts were formed.  And this is quite apart from how they

would appear if the same children were asked to use the same words in

stories involving "because" and "although".

 

Regards

Paula

-----Original Message-----

From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On

Behalf Of ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org

Sent: 08 June 2009 02:42 PM

To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity

Subject: RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment

 

Good point Michael. 

 

Would it be more specific to say that double-stimulation experiments 

formed the basis for the zpd?

 

eric

 

 

 

 

"michael" <mglevykh@telus.net>

Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu

06/05/2009 11:17 AM

Please respond to "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"

 

 

        To:     "'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>

        cc: 

        Subject:        RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment

 

 

Well put, Steve.

 

By the way, Eric, one of your earlier expressed assumptions that "much of

his [Vygotsky] theorizing about the zpd was done based on the blocks" is 

not

quite correct. To understand the basis of Vygotsky's ZPD, one has to go

beyond what was written in the immediate physical proximity (whether a

paragraph, section, or a chapter) of his writings on the ZPD. Vygotsky's

entire theory of cultural development dynamically situated in (created by

him) dialectically monistic paradigm along with all his analyses in units

(including the latest, perezhivaniye) served as a platform for his notion 

of

the ZPD. 

 

Best,

Michael

 

Michael G. Levykh, Ph.D.

 

-----Original Message-----

From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On

Behalf Of ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org

Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 8:37 AM

To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity

Subject: Re: [xmca] zpd additional comment

 

 

Very well thought out response Steve.  To analyse into units does seem to 

explain better the process of a socio-cultural exploration of development.

 

Michael, perhaps the scenario of a one-on-one tutor is all wrong.  Perhaps 

 

 

 

the literature needs to be culturally situated in a manner that isn't 

sterile?  With socio-cultural relevance perhaps that 18 year old can move 

to the zpd required for developing the higher psychological process of 

reading?

 

Just thinking out loud.  Moving my inner speech to a cultural context.

 

eric

 

 

 

 

Steve Gabosch <stevegabosch@me.com>

Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu

06/05/2009 06:49 AM

Please respond to "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"

 

 

        To:     "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>

        cc: 

        Subject:        Re: [xmca] zpd additional comment

 

 

Discussions on xmca about units of analysis always get me thinking. 

Michael's response is a good reminder that a scientific unit of 

analysis for a given situation is derived not just from the 

**objects** under investigation, but also from the methodological 

perspective of the **investigator**.  Always very good to keep this in 

mind.

 

A thought this conversation brings up for me stems from a point 

Holbrook Mahn made in a recent paper at ISCAR, **Vygotsky's Analysis 

of the Unit "System of Meaning"**.  He suggests that the term "unit of 

analysis" is not actually a correct translation of Vygotsky's 

discussion of this concept.  Better might be "analysis into units."

 

"The phrase "unit of analysis" is often used in cultural-historical, 

sociocultural research, usually

with an assumption that it is based on Vygotsky's methodological 

approach. In several places in

the 1987 English translation of Thinking and Speech, the phrase "unit 

of analysis" is used in

describing Vygotsky's analytical approach, even though this phrase 

does not appear in the

Russian text. For example, the phrase "unit of analysis" occurs in 

Chapter 1 of Thinking and

Speech on page 47. This phrase does not occur in the source text; the 

words that Vygotsky uses are: "eto otnosheniye soderzhitsya v 

izbrannoj nami yedinitse" (Vygotskij, 1934/2001, p. 13).

Translated word for word, this phrase is: "this relationship is 

contained in the unit selected by

us" ? the word which has been transformed into "of analysis" can only 

be the adjective

"izbrannoj" which indicates that the unit is "selected." "

 

Mahn goes on to discuss Vygotsky's method.

 

"Vygotsky's use of "analysis into units" to examine the origin and 

development of entities that result from the unification of distinct 

processes such as those of thinking and speaking that yield "the 

unified psychological formation of verbal thinking" (Thinking and 

Speech, [Plenum], 1987, p. 44) is often overlooked by researchers who 

use the concept "unit of analysis." "

 

My take on Mahn's discussion is to view Vygotsky's approach as seeking 

more than just analytical "units" per se.  Or, put another way, these 

"units" are much more complex and dynamic than meets the eye.  This 

approach seeks to understand "units" as dialectical **unities** of 

opposing processes.  In this view, the water molecule is not just an 

indivisible unit comprised of the elements oxygen and hydrogen.  It is 

also a complex chemical process that is a **dialectical unity**, a 

transformation (sublation) of these elements, which are processes 

themselves, into a new kind of entity, a new kind of process. 

"Analysis into units" might be even more precisely expresses as 

"analysis into dialectical unities," which forces the question "what 

is a dialectical unity?", and especially, what is the dialectical 

unity **in this case**?

 

I believe that CHAT researchers and practitioners, as a rule, in 

practice, and many also explicitly, follow this dialectical approach. 

But the heritage of the Western ideological traditions behind 

mainstream social theory has a way of providing a manner of speaking 

that tends to reduce processes, especially opposing processes, to just 

"things" or "units," such as oxygen and hydrogen "atoms" and water 

"molecules".  But this is just a bare starting point.  What can get 

lost in such a manner of speaking is how Vygotskians try to search for 

the **opposing processes** that are being transformed (sublated) into 

new entities, new kinds of processes.  Lacking dialectical 

terminology, methodological descriptions typical of Western bourgeois 

science can leave out things like motion and transformation, pointing 

to only static objects.  This is why taking a careful look, as Mahn 

does, of what is meant by the term "unit of analysis" is helpful.

 

So when Eric asks:

 

" ... [take the example of an] 18 year old functional illiterate who 

becomes serious about wanting to read. Providing numerous hours of 

tutoring ends in the student still at the picture stage of 

instruction.  Is there a unit of analysis for this specific 

example?" ...

 

... I interpret this as asking about the contradictory processes that 

are involved in the relevant dialectical "unities" in this situation. 

For example, what are the opposing processes at work that are driving 

(or could drive - or for that matter, hinder) this student in moving 

from one developmental zone to another?  What transformation will take 

place when these opposing processes combine into something new?

 

Some of these same (very abstract) kinds of questions may also be 

relevant for Mike's situation with his 4th grade friend who is 

struggling with multiplying minus numbers.  I certainly have no 

particular insights into these situations, which others on this list 

have far more experience in than I do.

 

But I will venture one general idea.  There may be some useful 

universal teaching principles involved, applicable to students of this 

or that age or situation, but there also may be some very individual 

questions of personal sense and meaningful experience (perezhivanie, 

another difficult to translate term Mahn discusses) involved, too, 

that must be taken carefully into account along with the content of 

the culturally established material.  I am referring of course to 

Vygotsky's very enlightening distinction between personal sense and 

social meaning.

 

And therein lies the rub.  Here, the teacher may have to be the one to 

do some developing and let the student teach them.  This of course is 

part of the art of teaching, to figure out, by understanding the 

student (and the material), how to reach them **concretely**.  At the 

same time, the personal sense of the student cannot really be conveyed 

in socially meaningful words because that is part of the nature of 

personal sense.  So the teacher (as a teacher) can only reach out to 

it and interact with it by seeking to transform it.  The consequence 

is a highly contradictory process for both the teacher and the 

student.  An easy thing to cheer both of them on to work out!   And 

sometimes, so terribly difficult and seemingly impossible a thing to 

do in practice ...

 

- Steve

 

 

 

On Jun 4, 2009, at 1:58 PM, michael wrote:

 

> Dear Eric,

> 

> 

> 

> I would certainly be willing to entertain the notion of a specific 

> unit of

> analysis in your hypothetical example (although operationalization 

> is not my

> field of expertise) if you were to reveal "where" your theoretical

> foundations (philosophical, psycho-educational, historical, socio- 

> cultural,

> and even mundane) are "situated."

> 

> 

> 

> Best,

> 

> Michael

> 

> 

> 

> Michael G. Levykh, Ph.D.

> 

> 

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca- 

> bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On

> Behalf Of ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org

> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 12:28 PM

> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity

> Subject: RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Thank you for your reply Michael.  The zpd is one of the most unique 

> and

> 

> hard to qualify concepts.  Indeed I agree that Vygotsky did not want 

> to

> 

> reduce people to their parts but rather take into account the entire

> 

> person, however, he does intimate that different aspects require 

> further

> 

> attention than others.  Much of his theorizing about the zpd was done

> 

> based on the blocks.  Solving the blocks presents a goal oriented

> 

> activity.  Some are quick to solve the blocks (interpreted as having a

> 

> large zpd) while others take more time and require more assistance

> 

> (interpreted as having a more narrow zpd); perhaps?  I am willing to

> 

> accept that I am incorrect on this.

> 

> 

> 

> For a specific example lets pick the WHO as being an 18 year old

> 

> functional illiterate who becomes serious about wanting to read. 

> Providing

> 

> numerous hours of tutoring ends in the student  still at the picture 

> stage

> 

> of instruction.  Is there a unit of analysis for this specific 

> example?

> 

> 

> 

> eric

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> "michael" <mglevykh@telus.net>

> 

> Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu

> 

> 06/04/2009 02:02 PM

> 

> Please respond to "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>        To:     "'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu 

 

 

 

 

> >

> 

>        cc:

> 

>        Subject:        RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Hello Eric,

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Before choosing a specific unit of analysis (which resembles

> 

> operationalization, or defining the way how a specific concept can be

> 

> observed and measured, which in itself is a reduction since, as 

> Vygotsky

> 

> points out, many features of cultural development are not directly

> 

> observable), it might be useful to know what (or, in the case of 

> zpd, WHO)

> 

> exactly is being analyzed and on what theoretical foundations

> 

> (philosophical, psycho-educational, historical, socio-cultural, and 

> even

> 

> mundane) these analyses are grounded.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Claiming that ZPD develops the whole child, on the one hand, and 

> choosing

> 

> a

> 

> mere approximation, a measurable unit of analysis that does not quite

> 

> address its dynamic and holistic features within and of the 

> dialectical

> 

> paradigm, on the other hand, is irresponsible and, in my opinion, is a

> 

> complete disregard for the very "Vygotsky" he (Chaiklin, 2003) is 

> trying

> 

> to

> 

> "authenticate."

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> There is something more to Vygotsky's intended notion of the ZPD 

> (like the

> 

> physical, spiritual, aesthetic, and ethical - things that go beyond 

> the

> 

> stage of "ethical obedience" -- aspects of the child's personality) 

> and

> 

> its

> 

> usage than what is made explicit in his writing. It is possible that

> 

> Vygotsky was willing to articulate practical and theoretical matters

> 

> related

> 

> to the ZPD in the absence of precise entailments and relations to 

> "other

> 

> aspects of the child's personality" because, although he did not 

> have a

> 

> chance to do so, he intended to provide a much more detailed account 

> on

> 

> the

> 

> ZPD at a later time. Unfortunately, unless and until all the other 

> aspects

> 

> of the child's personality (and whether they are specifically 

> addressed by

> 

> the ZPD) are made clear, the claim that the ZPD (as interpreted by

> 

> Chaiklin,

> 

> 2003) addresses the whole child would appear to be unconvincing.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Michael G. Levykh, Ph.D.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> 

> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca- 

> bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On

> 

> Behalf Of ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org

> 

> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 6:43 AM

> 

> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity

> 

> Subject: RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Hello Michael:

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> What are your thoughts on the actual unit being analysed?  Like to 

> know

> 

> 

> 

> your thoughts on this.

> 

> 

> 

> eric

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> "michael" <mglevykh@telus.net>

> 

> 

> 

> Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu

> 

> 

> 

> 06/03/2009 09:00 PM

> 

> 

> 

> Please respond to "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>        To:     "'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu 

 

 

 

 

> >

> 

> 

> 

>        cc:

> 

> 

> 

>        Subject:        RE: [xmca] zpd additional comment

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Dear Ulvi and All (interested in ZPD),

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> While I agree that Chaiklin is "dead on in his analysis on 

> [Vygotsky's]

> 

> 

> 

> ZPD," his analysis, in my humble opinion, is NOT "ALIVE" either. 

> There is

> 

> 

> 

> a

> 

> 

> 

> clear discrepancy in Chaiklin's (2003) interpretation of the ZPD. 

> While he

> 

> 

> 

> asserts that "the main features of the analysis of zone of proximal

> 

> 

> 

> development [concern the] whole child" (p. 50), his account of the 

> whole

> 

> 

> 

> child does not include explicit consideration of emotion. Yet, for

> 

> 

> 

> Vygotsky,

> 

> 

> 

> affect is the beginning and the end of the child's entire 

> psychological

> 

> 

> 

> development. Quoting Pistrak (reference unknown), Vygotsky (2004) 

> stated

> 

> 

> 

> that "The convictions that we may inculcate in school through 

> knowledge,

> 

> 

> 

> only grow roots in the child's psyche when these convictions are

> 

> 

> 

> reinforced

> 

> 

> 

> emotionally" (p. 55).  Surely, when dealing with the development of 

> the

> 

> 

> 

> whole child, it is of paramount importance (according to Vygotsky) 

> not to

> 

> 

> 

> separate intellectual from emotional features of the child's 

> development.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Michael G. Levykh, Ph.D.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> 

> 

> 

> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca- 

> bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On

> 

> 

> 

> Behalf Of ulvi icil

> 

> 

> 

> Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 12:13 PM

> 

> 

> 

> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity

> 

> 

> 

> Subject: Re: [xmca] zpd

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Many thanks

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> On 29/05/2009, ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org <ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org> wrote:

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> Ulvi:

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> here is a link to a comprehesive analysis of this concept:

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/ZOPEDS/Chailklin.pdf

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> Seth Chaiklin I believe is dead on in his analysis.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> eric

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> _______________________________________________

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> xmca mailing list

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> xmca mailing list

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> 

> 

> 

> xmca mailing list

> 

> 

> 

> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

> 

> 

> 

> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> 

> 

> 

> xmca mailing list

> 

> 

> 

> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

> 

> 

> 

> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

> 

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> 

> xmca mailing list

> 

> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

> 

> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> 

> xmca mailing list

> 

> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

> 

> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

> 

> _______________________________________________

> xmca mailing list

> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

 

_______________________________________________

xmca mailing list

xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

 

 

_______________________________________________

xmca mailing list

xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

 

 

_______________________________________________

xmca mailing list

xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

 

 

_______________________________________________

xmca mailing list

xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

 

_______________________________________________

xmca mailing list

xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

 

 

_______________________________________________

xmca mailing list

xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

 

_______________________________________________

xmca mailing list

xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

 

 

_______________________________________________

xmca mailing list

xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

 

 

_______________________________________________

xmca mailing list

xmca@weber.ucsd.edu

http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca