[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Re: Play and the Owl of Minerva
Hi Larry....
I was just throwing my toughs about RPG around... I will have to decide
by myself (or with a future advisor in PhD), but most probably i will do
both researches =)
Wagner
Em Sáb, 2010-03-20 às 23:48 -0700, Larry Purss escreveu:
> Hi Luiz
> I don't have the background or knowledge to give an opinion on your question.
> The reason I posted a reply to your article is because both play and games are activities in which the as-if imaginal realm is central and how the imaginal is related to development is a fascinating topic.
> Play and games and their place in our theories speaks to this larger issue of the realm of as-if and how this realm is related to the realm of as-is.
> Andy's comment in an earlier post that each specific theoretical relationship has particular patterns that must be particularly and situationaly elaborated is an important reminder that we must specify the relational dynamics of each theoretical antinomy. Ingrid Josephs exploring the specific interplay between the as-is realms and as-if realms and how they are dialectically related and her question of how "real" are the imaginal dialogues loved ones have with the deceased is a vivid example that the as-if realm informs not just games and play but also science, politics, self identity etc. Andy's reminder to clarify how our concepts are specifically related led me to post Ingrid Josephs article. Her relating the as-if realm when loved ones visit a gravesite and the place of the as-if realm in their constructing meaning in this social act of re-connecting with their deceased loved one on the as-if realm is a specific example of the dialectical yin/yang antinomies that seem to be co-occuring in the as-is/as-if dialectic. Ingrid's article emphasizes how re-connecting with the deceased transforms the as-is here-and now realm in the process of connecting with the deceased. Whether the author I'm reading is Markova Gillespie, Levyke's article on the ZPD posted by Peter S., Moscovici's theory of social representations the dialectical themes of self/other ant the imaginal/real are being elaborated. Exploring play and games and rule based behavior as they elaborate the place of the imaginal in the world seems to me to be specific dialogues of this much more general antinomy.
>
> Andy
> your post mentions that science is a particular type of rule based practise that focues on the as-is realm and hermeneutics is explicating the as-if realm. If this position is accepted it still leaves the question of the tension BETWEEN these realms. (I hope I'm reading your position as intended?)
> Hermeneutic interpretation (as-if) and science (as-is as Andy explains science) are related. As Andy recommends we have various notions of how they are related.
>
> Ingrid Josephs has a book she published in 2003 "Dialogicality and Development" which I have not read, but her engaging with the imaginary/reality tension and with the philosophy of as-IF is a book I will read soon.
>
> 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
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca