[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Re: Play and the Owl of Minerva
I want to apologize for my email's so often being sent as text attachments.
I write a response to a post and sometimes it goes through as a thread and others get sent as a text attachment. I guess I'll have to look into this quirk
Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: Wagner Luiz Schmit <mcfion@gmail.com>
Date: Saturday, March 20, 2010 6:49 pm
Subject: Re: [xmca] Re: Play and the Owl of Minerva
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> Hi Larry,
>
> After reading this i really need to improve my readings... But
> what you
> point out is one of the reasons why i choose the Role-playing games
> (like Dungeons and Dragons, Mage the Ascension and etc etc etc) as
> object of research... Right now i don't now if i will study the
> symbolsin those games and the re-elaboration of myths and
> "reality" in those
> games or i study how is the process of the development of the higher
> mental functions in those games... I see them like a lab to
> study how
> these functions are developing today with all this hypertext
> culture and
> etc etc etc... Those games are interesting because they deal
> with the
> fantastic, but you have numerical rules to describe magic and
> fantastical beings, or fictional situations: what some
> researchers here
> in Brazil will point out as a disenchantment of the world... One
> interesting thing about those games: People really enjoy it only after
> the age of 10 more or less... And many still play in adulthood (myself
> included)... In Europe some people claim that a variation of
> Role-playing games, the Live Action Role-playing games, is a
> kind of
> art
>
> I don't know if i'm making myself clear (i always few dumber
> writing in
> another language)...
>
> One of Vygotsky's texts that i most like is the "Imaginação e
> Criação na
> Infância" or "La imaginacion y el arte en la infancia" (I don't
> now the
> title in english, but in the portuguese version it is pointed
> that it
> was translated from the "Voobrajenie e tvortchestvo v detskom
> vozraste"from the book "Psikhologuia razvitia rebionka" Moscou:
> Eksmo, 2004 pg
> 235-326). In one moment he points out
>
> "Na verdade, a imaginação, base de toda atividade criadora,
> manifesta-se, sem dúvida, em todos os campos da vida cultural,
> tornandotambém possível a criação artística, a científica e a
> técnica. Nesse
> sentido, necessariamente, tudo o que nos cerca e foi feito pela
> mão do
> homem, todo o mundo da cultura, diferentemente do mundo da natureza,
> tudo isso é produto da imaginação e da criação humana que nela se
> baseia" (VIGOTSKI, 2009, pg. 14)
>
> Indeed, the imagination, the basis of all creative activity, is
> manifested, nevertheless, in all fields of cultural life, also making
> possible to artistic , scientific and technical creation. In
> this sense,
> necessarily, everything around us made by the hand of man, the whole
> world of culture, unlike the world of nature, all this is the
> product of
> imagination and the human creation that relies upon. (my translation,
> sorry for any mistakes. pg 9 in the spanish text from the
> Hispanicas, i
> don't have the english version)
>
>
> Wagner
>
>
>
> Em Sáb, 2010-03-20 às 08:20 -0700, Larry Purss escreveu:
> > Luiz
> > That was an interesting thread you sent on play and games and
> the tension between the concepts.
> > It is a fascinating topic.
> > I want to bring into the conversation a fascinating
> perspective on the place of the fictional and imaginary in play
> (and other activity).
> > First for some context.
> > I've always been curious about the antinomy often reflected in
> the tension between imagination/reality and the literature on
> modernity as the disenchantment of the world and the reaction to
> this privleging the as-IS reality over the as-IF reality.
> There is a counter literature on finding ways to re-enchant the world.
> > Often science is seen as the villan who is responsible for the
> loss of the as-IF reality, as children move beyond playful
> imagination into the real world.
> > Piaget's notions of animism as indicating immature thinking.
> > INGRID E. JOSEPHS takes a radically different perspective on
> the tension between the imaginary as-IF constructions and the
> figure-ground type relation to as-IS reality.
> > She wrote an article in HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 1198, Volume 41,
> pages 180-195 which explains very clearly this alternative
> interpretation of the as-IS and as-IF dialectic and how it
> infuses meaning with e-motion and explains the process of
> Vygotsky's internalization and Mead's I-ME dialectic.
> > Following is a quick summary of Ingrid's perspective on the
> imaginary in our devlopment.
> >
> > Symbol formation implies a TRANSCENDENCE of the here-and-now
> as-IS world by construction of the imaginary as-IF world.
> Ingrid's standpoint is an extension of Hans Vaihinger's [1911-
> 1986] "philosophy of the "AS-IF" as his notion of FICTIONALISM
> as an independent version of PRAGMATISM. (as an aside Alfred
> Adler said this book transformed his life).
> > Vaihinger believed as-If thinking was foundational for
> scientific reasoning.
> > Ingrid makes a further distinction between static
> nondevelopmental and dynamic/developmental accounts of as-
> IF. "BEING as-if" is static, whereas "BEING-AS-IF-COULD-
> BE" is dynamic. She points out this is similar to Bretherton's
> distinction of AS-IF and WHAT-IF. In dynamic notions, the as-IF
> is a step in the process of forward oriented preadaptation to
> the next MOMENTARY context. Development is based on as-IF types
> of apperception as each person participates in their own
> development. Rather than being MORE adaptive or BETTER Ingrid's
> position is that developmental transformations cannot be
> prejudged before the act. Whether it is better or worse is an
> evaluative question.
> > In summary imagination always begins in the known world of
> present and past and then one's horizon of understanding is
> stretched into the realm of the as-IF.. Ingrid points out this
> notion of as-IF is close to Cole's [1992, 1995] notions of
> personal duration. Ingrid states, "In imagination, not only do
> present, past, and future become MUTUALLY RELATED (and
> constructed), but both the person and world are transformed." p.184
> > Now to the more specific topic of SYMBOLIC PLAY that is being
> explored on this thread. Piaget understood play as pure
> assimilation that is necessary until developmentally the child
> can transcend this immature level of reality and with
> development SUBORDINATE the as-IF reality by the rational
> logical, and DECENTERED modes of entering reality. The as-
> If is not ascribed any PRODUCTIVE future oriented function in
> development. In contrast the position Ingrid (and Cole,
> Vygotsky, Mead,) are elaborating is that the AS-IF-COULD-BE
> operates throughout the lifespan.
> > [Note] I'm emailing this section because my software sometimes
> crashes> Larry
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Wagner Luiz Schmit <mcfion@gmail.com>
> > Date: Thursday, March 18, 2010 8:11 pm
> > Subject: Re: [xmca] Re: Play and the Owl of Minerva
> > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >
> > > I even didn't had time to read all e-mails (lots and lots of
> > > work to
> > > do), but games and development is exactly what i want to
> study
> > > in my
> > > doctorship.
> > >
> > > Do you heard about narratology David? this was used to study
> and
> > > analisegames for a while, and them other thing called
> ludology
> > > emerged...
> > > Take a look at this article:
> > >
> > > LUDOLOGY MEETS NARRATOLOGY:
> > > Similitude and differences between (video)games and narrative.
> > >
> > > http://www.ludology.org/articles/ludology.htm
> > >
> > > this is my two cents contribution to the discussion... and
> i'm
> > > very very
> > > interested too in this rational/irrational discussion too...
> but
> > > i don't
> > > have much to contribute now... Only that William James
> already was
> > > debating this =P (being a teacher of history of Psychology
> is very
> > > usefull)
> > >
> > > Wagner Luiz Schmit
> > > INESUL - Brazil
> > >
> > > Em Ter, 2010-03-16 às 18:13 -0700, David Kellogg escreveu:
> > > > Sorry, everybody!
> > > >
> > > > I wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > One of my grads tried to find the point at which a
> > > story definitively passes over into a game, and I said it
> was a
> > > little like trying to find the point where talk definitively
> > > passes over into talk. It is there, but we always find texts
> in
> > > talk, and talk in texts, no matter which side of the divide
> we
> > > may find ourselves on.
> > > >
> > > > I meant to write "it's a little like trying to find the
> point
> > > where talk passes over into TEXT". Halliday remarks
> somewhere
> > > that scientific linguistics didn't really start until the
> > > invention of the tape recorder.
> > > >
> > > > I was always puzzled by that remark until I realized that
> > > until the invention of the tape recorder, TEXT was
> synonymous
> > > with writing and TALK was synonymous with speech, and only
> > > people like Bakhtin and Vygotsky knew that there was a much
> > > deeper, underlying difference having to do with pastness and
> > > presentness, finalizeability and unfinalizedness.
> > > >
> > > > (When we look at Piaget's work on conservation it is quite
> a
> > > while before we realize how dependent on VISUALS it is. For
> the
> > > child, sound is not conserved at all, and of course neither
> is
> > > time. It is only with the discovery of language that the
> child
> > > can imagine the conservation of sound at all.)
> > > >
> > > > I think that the distinction between text and discourse is
> > > really the fast moving line between stories and games that
> we
> > > want: the story is past and the game is present, the story
> is
> > > finalizedness and the game is unfinalized and inherently
> > > unpredictable. So the story is a text, and the game is an
> > > ongoing discourse.
> > > >
> > > > I think, Andy, that in a game the problem is not autnomy
> per
> > > se. It's autonomy for a purpose, and purposes are almost by
> > > definition not only beyond the self but even beyond the
> present
> > > moment (and this is why Mike is so right to point out that
> EVERY
> > > act of culture or even private imagination has an implicit
> > > notion of "the good life" in it).
> > > >
> > > > Similarly, I don't think Vygotsky ever prizes volition for
> its
> > > own sake; it's always the freedom to produce and to create
> and
> > > to imagine "the good life" and to master the irrational
> forces
> > > which deprive life of that meaning, including those found
> within
> > > the self. It is in that sense that, yes, life is a game: it
> is
> > > meaningful through and through and to the very end. Not, I
> > > think, what the existentialists had in mind!
> > > >
> > > > David Kellogg
> > > > Seoul National University of Education
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Wittgenstein claimed that there is no overt over-
> arching
> > > and external trait between games (e.g. a common functional
> > > "motive" or a "goal"). When we read Vygotsky's play
> lectures, we
> > > find TWO common points: viz. gratuitous difficulty and guile-
> > > less deceit, the abstract rule and the imaginary situation.
> > > > > But one is always hidden when the other is abroad.
> > > After all, Wittgenstein's argument was only that there is no
> > > CLEARLY VISIBLE over-arching trait. And Vygotsky's reply is
> that
> > > if the essence of things were visible on the surface, as
> overt
> > > motive, or aim, or goal, why then no scientific explanation
> > > would ever be required for anything. His explanation of play
> is
> > > not an empiricist-functionalist but a historical,
> genetically,
> > > deterministic one, and the owl of Minerva flies only at nightfall.
> > > > > David Kellogg
> > > > > Seoul National University of Education
> > > > >
> > > > > --- On *Mon, 3/15/10, Andy Blunden
> /<ablunden@mira.net>/*
> > > wrote:> >
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Andy Blunden
> <ablunden@mira.net>> > > > Subject:
> Re: [xmca] Dialects of
> > > Development- Sameroff
> > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture,
> > > Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > > > > Date: Monday, March 15, 2010,
> 5:33 PM
> > > > >
> > > > > Way out of my depth in
> discussing
> > > play, but here is my take
> > > > > on "what is the motivation for play?"
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think we can or want to
> > > ascribe a motivation for
> > > > > participating in play *in
> general*.
> > > I.e., the question of
> > > > > "why does a child play?" cannot
> > > sensibly be answered by the
> > > > > child. But this still leaves the
> > > question of the motivation
> > > > > for any particular play
> activity:
> > > what is it that is
> > > > > motivating a child when they play?
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems to me that every action
> a
> > > child takes can be
> > > > > explicable in terms of its being
> > > part of a project, and the
> > > > > "Why are you doing that?"
> question
> > > gets the same kind of
> > > > > answer as it would for an adult
> at work.
> > > > >
> > > > > A different kind of explanation
> is
> > > required for why a child
> > > > > is drawn to participate in what
> is
> > > after all an "imaginary"
> > > > > project, then gun does not fire
> > > bullets, the money is not
> > > > > coin of the realm, etc. I think
> in
> > > answering the question at
> > > > > that level we look at problems
> the
> > > child faces in being
> > > > > exlcuded from the real world and
> > > their attempts to overcome
> > > > > that. I don't know. But from the
> > > beginning a child it trying
> > > > > to extricate themselves from the
> > > trap of childishness.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andy
> > > > >
> > > > > mike cole wrote:
> > > > > > Your helixes/helices
> seemed
> > > appropriate to the discussion, Martin.
> > > > > > XXX-history is cultural-
> > > historical genesis. And, as Steve suggested,
> > > > > > the twisted rope of many
> > > strands may be at the end of the rainbow of
> > > > > > promises.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been pondering
> David
> > > Ke's question about the
> > > > > >
> object/objective/motivation
> > > for play. It came together in my
> > > > > thinking with
> > > > > > Yrjo's metaphor of being
> > > always "just over the horizon" and its dual
> > > > > > material and ideal
> nature,
> > > most recently mentioned by
> > > > > Wolf-Michael. Might it
> > > > > > be the dream of being
> > > coordinated with a world entirely
> > > > > consistent with
> > > > > > one's own dreams? A
> world,
> > > extending, as Leslie White put it,
> > > > > that extends
> > > > > > from infinity to
> infinity,
> > > in both directions?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > probably not, just wondering.
> > > > > > mike
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at
> 2:55
> > > PM, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu
> > > > >
> > >
> <http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=packer@duq.edu>> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Larry,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I didn't mean to
> detract
> > > from the discussion with my playful
> > > > > helices. I
> > > > > >> haven't found time yet
> to
> > > read Sameroff's article, so I don't
> > > > > know if he is
> > > > > >> proposing that there is
> an
> > > antimony between nature and nurture
> > > > > in human
> > > > > >> development, or in our
> > > *conceptions* of development. I took Mike
> > > > > to be
> > > > > >> suggesting, in his
> recent
> > > message, that when we pay attention to
> > > > > culture we
> > > > > >> can transcend that
> > > antimony, since culture is a 'second nature' that
> > > > > >> provides nurture, and
> since
> > > culture is the medium in which human
> > > > > brains and
> > > > > >> bodies grow, and since
> all
> > > nurture offered to the growing child
> > > > > is mediated
> > > > > >> by culture, and since
> > > culture has been transforming human nature
> > > > > throughout
> > > > > >> anthropogenesis through
> its
> > > selective evolutionary pressures.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Eric, yes, I should
> have
> > > added phylogenesis, not just biological
> > > > > evolution.
> > > > > >> What then is the "XX-
> > > genesis" term for history?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Martin
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Mar 14, 2010, at
> 9:55
> > > PM, Larry Purss wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> It seems the double or
> > > triple helix is a significant way of
> > > > > trying to
> > > > > >> configure dynamic
> > > processes. However, what the particular
> > > > > specific double
> > > > > >> helix referred to in
> the
> > > article is pointing to is a very
> > > > > specific tension
> > > > > >> BETWEEN two specific
> > > constructs "Nature" and "nurture". The
> > > > > current debates
> > > > > >> raging about
> neuroscience
> > > on the one side and the tension with
> > > > > relational
> > > > > >> notions of development
> on
> > > the other hand (ie the
> > > > > >> self-other-
> > > object/representation triangle) suggest a dialectical
> > > > > tension
> > > > > >> which the article says
> may
> > > be INHERENT to development. To me
> > > > > this is asking
> > > > > >> a question about how
> the
> > > mind constructs significant social
> > > > > representations.
> > > > > >> What is specific
> > > about this particular double helix is the
> > > > > HISTORICAL
> > > > > >> salience of this
> SPECIFIC
> > > ANTIMONY through centuries of dialogue
> > > > > and theory.
> > > > > >> My question is "Is
> there
> > > significance to the extended duration
> > > > > of this
> > > > > >> specific antimony
> through
> > > centuries. Does this historical
> > > > > engagement with
> > > > > >> the specific notions of
> > > nature and nurture have relevance for CHAT
> > > > > >> discussions. This
> is
> > > not to say other double or triple helix
> > > > > models may not
> > > > > >> have more explanatory
> power
> > > but that is not the specific
> > > > > question asked in
> > > > > >> the article. The
> question
> > > being asked specifically is if this
> > > > > specific
> > > > > >> nature/nurture antinomy
> is
> > > inherent to the notion of
> > > > > development? Other
> > > > > >> double or triple
> helix's
> > > could be conceptualized within the
> > > > > nature/nurture
> > > > > >> antinomy but the
> question I
> > > believe is being asked is how relevant a
> > > > > >> dialectical (or
> > > alternatively dialogically) nature/nurture
> > > > > antinomy is to
> > > > > >> our primary
> (ontological??)
> > > notions of Development as a social
> > > > > >> representation.
> > > > > >>> When I read the
> article,
> > > it seemed to capture the tension we are
> > > > > >> exploring about the
> place
> > > of neuroscience in our theories of
> > > > > development.
> > > > > >> For some scholars one
> side
> > > or the other side is in ascendence and
> > > > > >> historically one side
> or
> > > the other is in ascendence. What the
> > > > > article is
> > > > > >> asking is if we must
> > > "INTEGRATE" what is often seen as in
> > > > > opposition and
> > > > > >> realize nature/nurture
> is
> > > in a figure/ground type of relational
> > > > > pattern
> > > > > >> (like the ying/yang
> visual
> > > representation) and the movement
> > > > > BETWEEN the two
> > > > > >> positions is basic to
> > > development.> > >>> Do others
> have
> > > thoughts on the specific question Arnie has
> > > > > asked in his
> > > > > >> article about the
> > > historical dynamic of the nature/nurture
> > > > > antinomy in
> > > > > >> developmental theories
> as
> > > well as in ontological and cultural
> > > > > historical
> > > > > >> development. This
> question
> > > speaks to me about the possible
> > > > > relevance of
> > > > > >> Moscovici's theory of
> > > social representations.
> > > > > >>> One alternative answer
> is
> > > to generate other double or triple
> > > > > helix models
> > > > > >> which may become social
> > > representations over time as they are
> > > > > debated in a
> > > > > >> community of inquiry
> but
> > > the article as written is pointing to a
> > > > > very
> > > > > >> salient social
> > > representation within our Western tradition. Does
> > > > > that
> > > > > >> recognition of its
> > > historical roots change how we view this
> > > > > particular
> > > > > >> antinomy?
> > > > > >>> Larry
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> ----- Original Message
> ----
> > > -
> > > > > >>> From: Martin Packer
> > > <packer@duq.edu> >
> > >
> <http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=packer@duq.edu>>> > >>> Date: Sunday, March 14, 2010 4:59 pm
> > > > > >>> Subject: Re: [xmca]
> > > Dialects of Development- Sameroff
> > > > > >>> To: "eXtended Mind,
> > > Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > >
> > >
> <http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>>> > >>>
> > > > > >>>> That's right, Steve,
> > > though I'm pretty sure I didn't see this
> > > > > >>>> title until after I
> made
> > > the diagram. And of course Lewontin is
> > > > > >>>> referring to
> different
> > > factors. And, also, of course, collagen
> > > > > >>>> actually does have a
> > > triple-helix structure, which Francis Crick
> > > > > >>>> thought was more
> > > interesting than the double helix of DNA, but
> > > > > >>>> which got very little
> > > attention.> > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Martin
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> On Mar 14, 2010, at
> 7:53
> > > PM, Steve Gabosch wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On the triple helix
> > > metaphor: Richard Lewontin used it
> > > > > >>>> in the title of his
> > > 1998/2000 collection of essays _The Triple
> > > > > >>>> Helix: Gene, Organism
> and
> > > Environment_. His core theme
> > > > > >>>> regarding biological
> > > development is that solely considering the
> > > > > >>>> interaction between
> gene
> > > and organism makes for bad
> > > > > >>>> biology.
> The
> > > environment has decisive influence as well.
> > > > > >>>>> - Steve
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On Mar 14, 2010, at
> > > 10:20 AM, Martin Packer wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> On Mar 14, 2010, at
> > > 1:04 PM, Larry Purss wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> What do others
> think
> > > of the double helix (and/or the other
> > > > > >>>> visual images in the
> > > article). How central is the double helix
> > > > > >>>> (either as an "is
> Like"
> > > or "IS" objectification) to your notions
> > > > > >>>> of the human sciences?
> > > > > >>>>>>> Larry
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> ...and I am pretty
> sure
> > > I stole, I mean appropriated, this
> > > > > >>>> from someone; I've
> > > forgotten who...
> > > > > >>>>>> <PastedGraphic-2.pdf>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > _______________________________________________>
> > > > >>>>>> xmca mailing list
> > > > > >>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > >
> > >
> <http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> > >>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > _______________________________________________>
> > > > >>>>> xmca mailing list
> > > > > >>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > >
> > >
> <http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> > >>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > > >>>>
> > > _______________________________________________>
> > > > >>>> xmca mailing list
> > > > > >>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > >
> > >
> <http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> > >>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > _______________________________________________>
> > > > >>> xmca mailing list
> > > > > >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > >
> > >
> <http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> > >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > > >>
> > > _______________________________________________>
> > > > >> xmca mailing list
> > > > > >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > >
> > >
> <http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> > >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > _______________________________________________>
> > > > > xmca mailing list
> > > > > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > >
> > >
> <http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -- ------
> ----
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > > > > Andy Blunden
> http://www.erythrospress.com/> > > >
> Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel,
> > > Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
> > > > > Ilyenkov $20 ea
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > _______________________________________________>
> > > > xmca mailing list
> > > > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > >
> > >
> <http://us.mc1103.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > -- --------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> > > ------------
> > > > Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
> > > > Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev,
> Meshcheryakov,
> > > Ilyenkov $20 ea
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >
> > any
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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