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

Re: [xmca] A.A. Leontiev on his father: very sad and lamentable :))



Peter,
And speaking of Vera, don't forget her book Creative Collaborations:
http://www.amazon.com/Creative-Collaboration-Vera-John-Steiner/dp/0195307704
-greg


On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu> wrote:

> Thanks Lubmomir, the article by AA Leontiev does a nice job, I think, of
> crediting people who are less famous than the 10 or so people associated
> with LSV whose names have survived history. Rene van der Veer has also
> helped to bring others into the picture (chapter in Cambridge Companion to
> Vygotsky). That sort of archeological work always helps to challenge the
> "lone genius" narrative that often accompanies success. I'm reading Chuck
> (Charles) Bazerman's The Languages of Edison's Light, and CB shows how TE
> led a large team of technicians/inventors that also relied on allies in the
> press, lawyers working the patent angle, and many many others to establish
> his reputation (which he worked hard to do at the expense of competitors).
> History often favors those who promote themselves, although I don't think
> I'd put LSV in that category. p
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> Behalf Of Lubomir Savov Popov
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 2:40 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Greg Thompson
> Subject: RE: [xmca] A.A. Leontiev on his father: very sad and lamentable
> :))
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> Leontiev was an exceptional scholar. He was very productive and made an
> era in the Soviet psychology. He also become a household name, at least for
> the people who have taken a course in psychology in high school or
> university. Those people believed that he is the best psychologist.
>
> There was definitely power struggle in the Soviet psychological community.
> The people who manage to gain the support of the Party elite tried to
> subdue the voices of the competition. They managed to publish more and
> become more prominent. There was quite strong sense for intellectual
> competition. The name of Leontiev was mentioned so many times that it is
> suspicious. There were many worthy psychologists that were not published
> that much and were somewhat sidelined. One example is Rubinstein. Some
> people credit him as a founder of activity theory or at least an important
> contributor. When we speak about activity theory, we also need to mention
> the Moscow Methodological Circle. If they had the support of the Party, we
> might have witnessed the spread of different ideas and a very different
> activity theory.
>
> That is life. Making science without power is a difficult task.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Lubomir Popov
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> Behalf Of Helena Worthen
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:34 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity; Greg Thompson
> Subject: Re: [xmca] A.A. Leontiev on his father: very sad and lamentable
> :))
>
> I agree with Greg's suggestion that some scholarship, maybe most, had been
> motivated by a "beef."  I don't think of this as a darker force, however.
> I think it's the desire to have the question at hand include everyone.
>
> You know how so many books on learning theory begin with a semi-historical
> sweep across other thinkers? And then the author seems to be saying, "Yes,
> very good, but what about.....?" This sweep is different on the one hand
> from just drawing a historical chart of influences with lines connecting
> names and dates, and different on the other hand from Knud Illeris' book
> "Contemporary Theories of Learning: Learning Theorists ...in their own
> words" -- which is certainly not a beef-generated book. It lets people say
> what they think in their own words so you can hear how the way they write
> fleshes out their ideas. And then there's Smokey Wilson's book, "What about
> Rose? Using teacher research to reverse failure," which is clearly a book
> written in order to bring into the discussion a particular kind of student
> that she feels is left out.
>
> I think of this as legitimate, not "dark." Of course I have been grumbling
> for years about how the learning of workers about how to survive the social
> relations of work is "left out" of most learning theory. That's my beef,
> and I don¹t consider it dark. I consider it worth doing.
>
> Helena
>
>
> On 6/25/13 8:58 AM, "Greg Thompson" <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Larry, I agree with the niceness of a spirit of collaborative inquiry,
> >but I wonder if this doesn't miss one of the most important forces in
> >the history of intellectual work - deep antagonism.
> >It seems that many of the most productive scholars have been motivated
> >by a "beef" they had with someone else, or because someone had called
> >them out in one way or another, or because they split with someone and
> >wanted to prove the value of their position.
> >I'd rather if collaboration were enough (and maybe for some it is - and
> >I'll continue to hold out hope for this position), but seems like there
> >is often a darker force involved...
> >-greg
> >
> >
> >On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> How,
> >>
> >> The *style* of *presentation* of disputes may be a key aspect of
> >> *facts* when presented.
> >> The expression "let the facts speak for themselves"
> >>  may under estimate the formation of facts within particular styles
> >> of presentation.
> >>
> >> However some particular styles of presentation may be more
> >>facilitative of  double stimulation within co-ordinated projects such
> >>as collaborative  inquiry AS shared quests.
> >> This collaborative inquiry is the *spirit* I encounter on this
> >>listserv and  the style of presentation as much as the facts generated
> >>[or emerging from  the beyond as new beginnings] is critical for its
> >>common sense of inquiry  AS quest.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
> >> >wrote:
> >>
> >> > It is certainly interesting to hear history disputed.  I don't
> >>understand
> >> > why it requires mocking however -- whatever one has to say is
> >> > surely polluted by it.
> >> >
> >> > Huw
> >> >
> >> > On 24 June 2013 21:26, Anton Yasnitsky <the_yasya@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Very sad and lamentable indeed.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > In contrast to this ungrounded piece of hagiography and
> >> > > propaganda produced the late Alexei Leontiev, fils
> >> > >
> >> > > see two recent works that provide nice evidence against this
> >> mythological
> >> > > account of how 'zee bloody KGB'
> >> > >
> >> > > [virtually fully] destroyed Vygotsky and his legacy.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > 1. Contra the legend of continuity:
> >> > > See the most recent paper that has just come out in the
> >>Interamerican
> >> > > Journal of Psychology --
> >> > >
> >> > > Da relação Vigotski e Leontiev ­ Alguns apontamentos a respeito
> >> > > da história da psicologia soviética  by Joao Batista Martins
> >> > > (full text available online)
> >> > >
> >> > > http://journals.fcla.edu/ijp/article/view/76642
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > This one is in Portuguese, but quite incidentally, a somewhat
> >>similar
> >> > > publication is going to come out soon
> >> > >
> >> > > in English, Portuguese and Russian in the most well-known all
> >> > > over
> >>the
> >> > > globe Russian psychological journal PsyAnima, Dubna Psychological
> >> > > Journal [ http://www.psyanima.ru/ ],
> >> fully
> >> > > available online.
> >> > >
> >> > > If interested, don't miss the revolutionary and revisionist
> >> > > special
> >> > issues
> >> > > of this edition.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > 2. Contra the legend of the Stalinist suppresion of Vygotsky :
> >> > >
> >> > > See the forthcoming refutation of the piles of the age-old lies
> >>about
> >> the
> >> > > "Vygotsky ban" in the groundbreaking study
> >> > >
> >> > > conducted most recently by young -- but very promising -- scholar
> >>Jenn
> >> > > Fraser  (remember this name!):
> >> > >
> >> > > Jenn Fraser
> >> > >
> >> > > Deconstructing
> >> > > Vygotsky¹s Victimization Narrative:
> >> > > A
> >> > > Re-Examination of the Stalinist ³Suppression² of Vygotskian
> >> > > Theory
> >> > >
> >> > > Other than that, A.A. Leontiev's piece is a fairly entertaining
> >> > > and somewhat amazing read, indeed :)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers,
> >> > >
> >> > > AY
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > ________________________________
> >> > >  From: Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>
> >> > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >> > > Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 1:39:51 PM
> >> > > Subject: [xmca] A.A. Leontiev on his father
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > I've had an opportunity to read the attached historical account
> >> > > that
> >> > Haydi
> >> > > sent a week or so ago (re-attached here). It's quite fascinating,
> >>too
> >> > long
> >> > > to reduce easily to a listserv post, but I'll try.
> >> > >
> >> > > The essay helps to complicate some issues that I have
> >>oversimplified in
> >> > > the past. One of the main points of the account is to challenge
> >> > > the
> >> > belief
> >> > > that Leontiev and LSV had a severe break when Leontiev left for
> >> Kharkov.
> >> > > The narrative I've always accepted is that Leontiev shifted away
> >>from
> >> the
> >> > > ideal and toward activity, and in so doing shifted away from LSV
> >>both
> >> > > professionally (and geographically) and personally. AA Leontiev's
> >> account
> >> > > of his father's relationship with Vygotsky sees their departure
> >> > > as
> >> > lacking
> >> > > the hostility generally attributed to it, and also sees
> >> > > Vygotsky's
> >>work
> >> > > involving the seeds of activity as a unit of analysis, thus
> >>challenging
> >> > the
> >> > > idea of a complete professional break. I think that Michael Roth
> >>tried
> >> to
> >> > > persuade me that their differences were not so great, and this
> >> > > essay
> >> > would
> >> > > support that view. It's worth reading if you have interest in the
> >> > > disposition of their relationship shortly before Vygotsky's death.
> >> > >
> >> > > The second area I found interesting (and tragic) is the idea that
> >> > > Vygotsky's depression over the impending pedology decree (which
> >> rendered
> >> > > his own work anti-Marxist and incorrect) led him to bring on his
> >> > > own
> >> > death.
> >> > > Mike Cole mentioned to me a few years ago that he thought
> >> > > Vygotsky
> >> > allowed
> >> > > himself to die rather than face the inevitable destruction of his
> >>life
> >> > and
> >> > > career in the Stalinist crackdown of the 1930s. This account
> >> > > fully
> >> > supports
> >> > > that perspective, with evidence of LSV's careless health habits
> >>toward
> >> > the
> >> > > end in spite of his delicate bodily functions (he began smoking,
> >> stopped
> >> > > shielding himself from the Russian winters, lived in unhealthy
> >> > environments
> >> > > without concern for health effects). Very sad and lamentable.
> >> > >
> >> > > The essay concludes with the post-Vygotskian repression of his
> >> followers
> >> > > and their shattered careers in the face of accusations of
> >>anti-Marxism
> >> > and
> >> > > accompanying arrests, dismissals, and deaths.
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks for sharing. I'm the richer for having read it, even as my
> >>brief
> >> > > summary here does the essay insufficient justice. p
> >> > >
> >> > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>[mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> >> > On
> >> > > Behalf Of Haydi Zulfei
> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 6:05 AM
> >> > > To: "ablunden@mira.net"; "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
> >> > > Subject: Fw: Fw: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Excuse me . I forgot to attach a son's defense of his father .
> >> > > Haydi
> >> > > ----- Forwarded Message -----
> >> > > From: Haydi Zulfei <haydizulfei@rocketmail.com>
> >> > > To: "ablunden@mira.net" <ablunden@mira.net>; "eXtended Mind,
> >>Culture,
> >> > > Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, 18 June 2013, 14:23:38
> >> > > Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Dear Michael Cole
> >> > > If I may , and if I might be able to have a very little talk to
> >> > > your supreme greatness , and if I'm not to be reproached to have
> >> > > decided
> >>to
> >> > > write in a foreign language , then to your benevolent permission
> >>will I
> >> > > dare to tell you : I do know I'm not the one who can discuss such
> >> matters
> >> > > with you but as everybody has reasons for their claims , I'm
> >>willing to
> >> > > relate : USSR was gone and you were relieved of many monstrous
> >>maladies
> >> > > there , not just of Stalinism , the destruction of which and whom
> >> > > is
> >> the
> >> > > unique slogan of the whole world , but also of Leninism , Marxism
> >>(to
> >> > which
> >> > > Vygotsky credited his time and energy) , ... , and especially of
> >> > > the
> >> dark
> >> > > terrible atmosphere in which you , of your own decision and care
> >> > > and
> >> > desire
> >> > > , with wife and children or child , could gaspingly and
> >> > > suffocatedly breathe , live , learn , get skilled and ... become
> >> > > the Global
> >>Figure
> >> > > (Yasnitsky in LiveJournal) mostly because of the knowledge and
> >> > > wit
> >>and
> >> > > wisdom (professionally) you
> >> > > got there of the [Marxian] [Materialistic] [Vygotskian] [School]
> >> > > and
> >> the
> >> > > much-appreciated works you did later in THIS respect . You were
> >> > > not
> >> with
> >> > > the common people ; you were with the [Great Scholars] of that
> >> > > time
> >> > WITHIN
> >> > > THE SOVIET UNION , no need to mention the Names , as for one of
> >> > > them
> >> the
> >> > > Poor Bratus you denounced shortly recently .
> >> > > The knowledge accumulated within the body or psyche of , or , as
> >> > > you
> >> like
> >> > > to say , the 'spirit' or the soul of these renown scholars came
> >> > > ONLY
> >> from
> >> > > their MOTHERS and from the Uteros thereof ? or from the Tsar ?
> >> > > After
> >> all
> >> > ,
> >> > > you always refer to the one experiment according to which 'culture'
> >> > > accumulates and then exits through the Uterus . Just one question
> >> > remains :
> >> > > why tolerate so much toiling and troubles going there ? The Land
> >> > > of
> >> > Ghosts
> >> > > and Man-Eater Dragons ? Are not great figures products of their
> >> > > time
> >> and
> >> > > environment (Revolution meant) ? Mourning is still on for the
> >> > > Huge
> >> Losses
> >> > > but this is just one side of the coin !
> >> > > Now , very shortly , you are Ok with all your assertions and
> >>beliefs .
> >> > Why
> >> > > so much focusing on the Dead and not on the Living ?? What is
> >> > > your PRESCRIPTION for the unprecedented huge numerous
> >> > > incalculable inhumanitarian soul-exterminatig vicious maladies ,
> >> > > vices , and beast-natured acts of the American Adminstration and
> >> > > their
> >>profiteering
> >> > > Mother-and-Daughter CORPORATIONS all over the world (apologies to
> >>great
> >> > > American people) , MONOPOLIES , COHORTS , BEN-LADIN BEARING
> >>OCTOPUSES ,
> >> > > ETC. ETC. ETC.
> >> > > WE ARE JUST VICTIMS TO SANCTIONS IMPOSED ON 'PEOPLE' NOT
> >> ADMINISTRATION .
> >> > > WE ARE BEING SANDWICHED AND STAMPED UNDER TERROR , CRUELTY AND
> >> > > THE
> >> > > OTHERNESS?-  MEDDLING WITH OUR OWN AFFAIRS ; WE JUST SHOWED OUR
> >>WILL ,
> >> > WAY
> >> > > AND FATE BUT GRANDPA? IS ALIEN AND KILLER TO HOMO SAPIENS GENUS ,
> >>LET
> >> > ALONE
> >> > > , WISE CONSCIOUS DIGNIFIED PEACEFUL CREATURES .
> >> > > It's the same with people of Egypt , Jordon , Libya , Turkey ,
> >> > > Iraq
> >>,
> >> > > Afghanistan , etc. From the American Administration perspective ,
> >>what
> >> > > might partially ? be a Spring Time is within the Arabian Peninsula .
> >> > There
> >> > > , too , heads go off the air with a sword so that extra cheap oil
> >>can
> >> > > overflow within the storage huge bankers of the U.S.  Better
> >> > > handle
> >> > nearby
> >> > > Problems !!
> >> > > Best
> >> > > Haydi
> >> > >
> >> > > Request : no naming of nationales , thanks !
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > ________________________________
> >> > > From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
> >> > > To: lchcmike@gmail.com; "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <
> >> > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, 18 June 2013, 9:59:46
> >> > > Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [xmca] Double Stimulation?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Just on the question of Luria, Mike. I am not all that familiar
> >> > > with Luria's distinct contribution, for which I have only myself
> >> > > plus
> >>having
> >> > > only one lifetime to blame. But if he is famous for the use of
> >> > > the
> >> > > *idiographic* methodology, then as I see it that is indeed
> >> > > something
> >> > which
> >> > > dates from Goethe, and I have never particularly highlighted that
> >>in my
> >> > own
> >> > > work. The Urphaenomen is another aspect of Romantic Science. So
> >>these
> >> are
> >> > > different things, closely related and having the same roots.
> >> > > Maybe
> >>it
> >> is
> >> > > time for me to use the great Luria On-line Library you have
> >> > > created
> >>to
> >> > > educate myself about Luria.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Andy
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > mike cole wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > I fear this does not help me a whole lot, Andy.
> >> > >
> >> > > > Sorry I cannot grasp the method of Goethe properly. I guess
> >> > > > Luria
> >> > > probably failed
> >> > >
> >> > > > as well. Or maybe he succeeded and I have misunderstood him?
> >>Entirely
> >> > > possible.
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > I did not ask what what is  at odds. I asked for what the
> >>empirical
> >> > > consequences of the the distinctions you are making are. I cannot
> >> follow
> >> > > the path to reforming all of the educational system of the USSR
> >> > > or
> >> > Russia,
> >> > > which, so far as I know, neither
> >> > >
> >> > > > Vygotsky nor anyone else associated with Activity Theory every
> >> > > accomplished. Nore have I ever seen claims that they have. (The
> >>Finns
> >> > > appear to have done well recently using an approach, the
> >>relationship
> >> to
> >> > > activity theory I have no knowledge of, but perhaps our Finnish
> >> > colleagues
> >> > > do).
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > Here is what would help me, and I suspect others on XMCA. Take
> >> > > > an
> >> > > already published piece of work that uses the expanded triangle
> >> > > Yrjo proposes in Learning by Expanding. Say, the work on cleaners
> >> > > in the
> >> early
> >> > > work. Tell us about the mistaken conclusions that arise because
> >> > > of misunderstandings that confusion of the triangle for
> >> > > "activity" (no
> >> > > modifiers) causes. Suggest how we might improve our
> >> > >
> >> > > > understanding. Or tell us why that example works, but some
> >> > > > other
> >> > example
> >> > > (teachers in schools, nurses and doctors in a hospital, etc.)
> >> > > does
> >>not.
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > Or suggest an entirely different way of looking at matters so
> >> > > > that
> >> when
> >> > > we go into
> >> > >
> >> > > > classrooms, housing projects, work places, we can more
> >> > > > effectively
> >> > > understand what is going on and be of more help to those with
> >> > > whom
> >>we
> >> > work
> >> > > that publishing another article in MCA.
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > I guess I am asking that you rise to the concrete here, keeping
> >>the
> >> > > object of analysis constant.
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > My apologies if this seems unreasonable. Perhaps it is
> >> > > > approaching
> >> > > senility, but
> >> > >
> >> > > > I am failing to track you.
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > mike
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > Lost in the words here.
> >> > >
> >> > > > mike
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Andy Blunden
> >> > > > <ablunden@mira.net
> >> > <mailto:
> >> > > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >     Yes, in Yjro's (1986) words, it is a "root model". (The
> >> derivation
> >> > >
> >> > > >     of it is a beautiful piece of work, too, close to Hegel's
> >>early
> >> > >
> >> > > >     "System of Ethical Life". Deserves to remain in print).
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >     But modelling a complex process is not the same as the
> >> > > > method
> >>of
> >> > >
> >> > > >     Goethe, Hegel, Marx and Vygotsky. As you know, Mike, in
> >> > > > order
> >>to
> >> > >
> >> > > >     understand this approach, which Luria called Romantic
> >>Science, I
> >> > >
> >> > > >     had to go back to its origins c. 1787 when Goethe was doing
> >>his
> >> > >
> >> > > >     Journey in Italy, studying all the plant life, and its
> >>variation
> >> > >
> >> > > >     by altitude, latittude, nearness to the sea, etc., and in
> >> > >
> >> > > >     conversation with J G Herder, arrived a his conception of
> >> > >
> >> > > >     Urphaenomen. The Urphaenomen is not a model.
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >     It is an abstraction, true. And yes, the understanding of a
> >> > >
> >> > > >     complex process by the "romantic" method is indeed, the
> >>rising to
> >> > >
> >> > > >     the concrete, the logical-historical reconstruction of the
> >>whole
> >> > >
> >> > > >     process from this abstract germ.
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >     As I remarked (somewhere) I find Yrjo's work over the past
> >>couple
> >> > >
> >> > > >     of years, which focuses more on the germ cell than the
> >>triangle,
> >> > >
> >> > > >     closer to what I am trying to do. The germ cell is not a
> >> > > > model
> >> > > either.
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >     What is at odds here is whether a real, complex situation
> >>(such
> >> as
> >> > >
> >> > > >     reforming the education system in a nation in Africa,
> >> > > > rather
> >>than
> >> > >
> >> > > >     in the USSR or Finland) can be based on a conception which
> >> > >
> >> > > >     isolates a "system of activity", whilst dozens of different
> >> > >
> >> > > >      ethnic groups, NGOs, government(s), trade unions and so
> >> > > > on,
> >>are
> >> > >
> >> > > >     all contesting the aims and benefits of "education." Every
> >>person
> >> > >
> >> > > >     in such a situation is committed to more than one project,
> >> > > > and
> >> > >
> >> > > >     deploys concepts (institutionalised projects) frequently at
> >>odds
> >> > >
> >> > > >     with one another. What is needed is a process whose basic
> >>units
> >> > >
> >> > > >     are (1) units and not systems, and (2) processes of
> >>development,
> >> > >
> >> > > >     processes in which people are struggling to realise ideas,
> >> > >
> >> > > >     processes of formation. And we need the algebra through
> >> > > > which
> >> such
> >> > >
> >> > > >     units interact with one another, rather than declaring any
> >>single
> >> > >
> >> > > >     such interaction to be an entire new "unit" - i.e. coupled
> >> systems.
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >     Andy
> >> > >
> >> > > >     mike cole wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >         Isn't the trangle a "model, " Andy? A model of the root
> >> > >
> >> > > >         metaphor. Still an abstraction... waiting to see if it
> >> > > > can
> >> > >
> >> > > >         rise to the concrete? Perhaps?
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >         Empirically speaking, what is at odds here? For whom?
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > >         mike
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > __________________________________________
> >> > >
> >> > > _____
> >> > >
> >> > > 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
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> >Visiting Assistant Professor
> >Department of Anthropology
> >883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> >Brigham Young University
> >Provo, UT 84602
> >http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> >__________________________________________
> >_____
> >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
>



-- 
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Visiting Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca