Re: [xmca] Re: Luria - New Vodka Old Bottle PDF

[Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>]

Charles, Greg
Thank you for this emerging topic and theme of interdisciplinary
possibilities.
Charles, has there been an *historical effect* of your writing this article
on the journal *Psychiatry*.

The emergence of *family systems therapy* was strongly influenced by the
William Alanson White institute [for example Salvador Minuchin studied
there.
Psychoanalysis is also impacted through *interpersonal psychiatry*  in its
relational turn.

A central motif emerging within this tradition is the understanding of
*anxiety* [as POSSIBLE or anticipated stress].

A central question becomes, "How do I [or we] make ourselves safe?"

How central is this question concerning *anxiety* as a factor that
motivates actions? I often ask this question when exploring communicative
praxis or pragmatic understandings. Many of the examples in the 12 issues
of the journal explored are exploring the possibility of [or avoidance of]
perceived anxiety.

Fascinating topic.
Thanks,
Larry



On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Charles Bazerman <
bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote:

> Thanks for the Group Processes reference.  I will have to wait until after
> travels this summer to get a hard copy, as the ecopy seems to be locked
> down.
> Peirce, I agree makes an important move by recognizing the importance of
> interpretation, but despite looking at his works a number of times on the
> recommendation of people I trust, I find he does not get us far enough.
>  This is what I have to say about him in my soon to be released volume A
> Theory of Literate Action.
> best,
> Chuck
>
> Peirce's semiotics with interpretation
>         Charles Peirce, among the founding generation of pragmatists,
> looked most directly at language and semiotics, making some first steps
> towards articulating the implications of a pragmatist view for language and
> language use. Most importantly, he recognized a major role for the
> interpreting speaker and interpreting hearer in the meanings conveyed by
> communication, rather than assuming meaning was immanent in an abstracted
> language system (Peirce, 1958). It is people who attach meanings to
> experienced worlds and issues of concern. This recognition of the
> importance of interpretive processes might lead to an investigation of how
> differences in individuals and groups of individuals might influence the
> bases and procedures of interpretation within specific situations
> (potentially a psychological, sociological, anthropological and even
> historical inquiry). Peirce, however, chose to seek clarity through a
> semiotic taxonomy of the relations among signs, objects, and interpretants
> (t
> hat is interpreted meanings), a taxonomy that he kept adjusting throughout
> his life. His account does suggest some of the instability of semiosis, as
> meanings are dynamically produced through interpretation, which is
> potentially infinite; nonetheless, he seems to believe that this
> instability can be contained by establishing an abstract philosophic
> vocabulary about the relations of signs, objects, and interpretants. His
> taxonomy does not provide any specific leads about how we might inquire
> into the psychological or sociological variables of meaning making and
> interpretation. In not pursuing the motives of the individual nor the
> development of the individual in satisfying needs within the social and
> material worlds, Peirce leaves us with a mystery of the individuality of
> interpretation creating indeterminacy of meaning, with no way to get back
> to the sources, needs, and mechanisms for meaning making. Yet it is these
> underlying forces that drive all utterances including writin
> g and lead to the proliferation of new texts, new genres, and new fields
> of literate interaction. Pierce, therefore, does not yet provide us with an
> understanding of how and why people use language to produce the creative
> inventions that are at the heart of the pragmatic worldview.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> Date: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 10:33 am
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Re: Luria - New Vodka Old Bottle PDF
> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>
> > Many thanks for this article - it is wonderful. And I totally agree that
> > language-as-activity is the place to look for an interdisciplinary
> science
> > of human behavior (and I'd agree that Vygotsky doesn't quite give us
> enough
> > of a theory of language, but I might add Peirce to your additions of
> > Volosinov and Bakhtin).
> >
> > When I started reading your article I thought for a minute, based on the
> > list of scholars, that you were describing the Macy conferences held
> > between 1948 and 1953, published under the name Group Processes. These
> > were
> > an incredibly eclectic collection of scholars, including anthropologists,
> > psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists, biologists, mathematicians,
> > engineers, and linguists.
> >
> > I found these to be particularly fascinating b.c. there aren't many times
> > when you can actually read the words of advice that margaret Mead and
> > Gregory Bateson gave to Erving Goffman - it really puts things in
> > perspective to see how much criticism was heaped on these geniuses
> (perhaps
> > we should think of the criticism from others as a part of their genius?).
> > Here is a link to the google books ref for the second volume:
> > http://books.google.com/books/about/Group_processes.html?id=goMIAQAAIAAJ
> >
> > and here is a review of the second volume (on the bottom of the page -
> > not
> > the neuropharmacology one on LSD - although I think that was in the same
> > series!):
> > http://www.psychosomaticmedicine.org/content/19/2/173.2.full.pdf
> >
> > Note that Volume 2 includes one of Bateson's earlier formulations of the
> > problem of the message "This is Play". Fascinating to watch ideas form...
> >
> > And honestly I can't imagine a conference today approaching the
> > intellectual breadth of the Macy conferences. So maybe this isn't just
> > a
> > pendulum swinging closer and then further from interdisciplinarity. Maybe
> > we are getting further and further away from the possibility of a true
> > and
> > lasting interdisciplinarity?
> >
> > -greg
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Charles Bazerman <
> > bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > You might look into the history of the journal Psychiatry, which was
> > part
> > > of an attempt to reunify the social sciences around the problems of
> > living.
> > > On the board were the founder of linguistic anthropology Edward
> > Sapir and
> > > the founder of modern propaganda studies Harold Lasswell
> > > took major roles alongside the founding editor, psychiatrist Harry
> Stack
> > > Sullivan. Its lead article of the first volume was in particular Edward
> > > Sapir ‘Why cultural anthropology needs the psychiatrist,’ (Psychiatry,
> > > 1938, 1: 1, 7–12). This was republished as
> > > Edward Sapir (2001). Why Cultural Anthropology Needs the Psychiatrist.
> > > Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes: Vol. 64, No. 1,
> > pp.
> > > 2-10.
> > >
> > > I have done an analysis of the early volumes Practically human: The
> > > pragmatist project of the interdisciplinary journal Psychiatry, which
> > > appeared in the initial issue of Linguistics and the Human
> > > Sciences. LHS vol 1.1 2005: 15–38.
> > > I am attaching it here as it raises the entire dilemma of the
> fragmenting
> > > of the social sciences and the attempts to reunify them.
> > >
> > > Chuck Bazerman
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > > Date: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 8:49 am
> > > Subject: Re: [xmca] Re: Luria - New Vodka Old Bottle PDF
> > > To: Carol Macdonald <carolmacdon@gmail.com>, "eXtended Mind, Culture,
> > > Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > >
> > > > Carol,
> > > > I like your suggestion that psych students should take anthropology
> > > > courses, and would add that anthro students should take psych courses
> > > > as
> > > > well so that they don't see psychological researchers as a kind of
> > > > bogeyman.
> > > > But maybe there needs to be something more since this can create a
> > Necker
> > > > cube either/or effect - where the student feels that these are two
> > > > incommensurate fields and that they must choose one or the other.
> > > > Maybe everyone should take a course in Cultural Psychology? (okay,
> > that's
> > > > not going to happen, but it would be a nice way to introduce the
> > > > concept of
> > > > "interdisciplinarity" in a more serious manner).
> > > > -greg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:00 AM, <carolmacdon@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Well I was thinking about that claim this morning and I think
> > that our
> > > > > psychology dept within itself offers very different courses now
> > but
> > > > all
> > > > > under the same department. In education we have very different
> courses
> > > > > under the rubric of psychology in education eg cultural
> > psychology in
> > > > > education. Of course we think that activity theory is where it's
> > all
> > > > at but
> > > > > we are minuscule proportion of the psychologists in the country.
> > Of
> > > > course
> > > > > I would be happy to work in linguists and anthropologists but
> > > psychologists
> > > > > here are not able to make that leap. Perhaps if psych students were
> > > > advised
> > > > > to take anthroplolgy
> > > > > Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you!
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > > > > Sender: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > > Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 07:36:56
> > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity<xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > > > > Reply-To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] Re: Luria - New Vodka Old Bottle PDF
> > > > >
> > > > > I imagine Nicholas would find mikes suggestion of ethnographic
> > > psychology
> > > > > to be BORING. Why no call for the integration of philosophy or
> other
> > > > > humanities into the social sciences?
> > > > > This sounds to me like the very old argument that the social
> > > > sciences need
> > > > > to be more like the natural sciences.
> > > > > Old whine, new bottle...
> > > > > Greg
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > >
> > > > > On Jul 23, 2013, at 3:25 AM, Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > The NY Times ran an op-ed on Sunday that might be of interest
> > to
> > > people
> > > > > dissatisfied with the current state of academic disciplines:
> > > > > > Gray Matter
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let's Shake Up the Social Sciences
> > > > > >
> > > > > > By NICHOLAS A. CHRISTAKIS
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Published: July 19, 2013
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > TWENTY-FIVE years ago, when I was a graduate student, there were
> > > > > departments of natural science that no longer exist today.
> > > > Departments of
> > > > > anatomy, histology, biochemistry and physiology have disappeared,
> > > replaced
> > > > > by innovative departments of stem-cell biology, systems biology,
> > > > > neurobiology and molecular biophysics. Taking a page from
> > Darwin, the
> > > > > natural sciences are evolving with the times. The perfection of
> > cloning
> > > > > techniques gave rise to stem-cell biology; advances in computer
> > science
> > > > > contributed to systems biology. Whole new fields of inquiry, as
> > well
> > > > as
> > > > > university departments and majors, owe their existence to fresh
> > > discoveries
> > > > > and novel tools.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In contrast, the social sciences have stagnated. They offer
> > > essentially
> > > > > the same set of academic departments and disciplines that they have
> > > > for
> > > > > nearly 100 years: sociology, economics, anthropology, psychology
> > and
> > > > > political science. This is not only boring but also
> counterproductive,
> > > > > constraining engagement with the scientific cutting edge and
> > > > stifling the
> > > > > creation of new and useful knowledge. Such inertia reflects an
> > > unnecessary
> > > > > insecurity and conservatism, and helps explain why the social
> sciences
> > > > > don't enjoy the same prestige as the natural sciences.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One reason citizens, politicians and university donors
> > sometimes lack
> > > > > confidence in the social sciences is that social scientists too
> > > > often miss
> > > > > the chance to declare victory and move on to new frontiers. Like
> > > natural
> > > > > scientists, they should be able to say, "We have figured this topic
> > > > out to
> > > > > a reasonable degree of certainty, and we are now moving our
> > > > attention to
> > > > > more exciting areas." But they do not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not suggesting that social scientists stop teaching and
> > > > > investigating classic topics like monopoly power, racial
> > profiling and
> > > > > health inequality. But everyone knows that monopoly power is bad
> > for
> > > > > markets, that people are racially biased and that illness is
> unequally
> > > > > distributed by social class. There are diminishing returns from
> > the
> > > > > continuing study of many such topics. And repeatedly observing
> these
> > > > > phenomena does not help us fix them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So social scientists should devote a small palace guard to
> settled
> > > > > subjects and redeploy most of their forces to new fields like
> social
> > > > > neuroscience, behavioral economics, evolutionary psychology and
> > social
> > > > > epigenetics, most of which, not coincidentally, lie at the
> > > > intersection of
> > > > > the natural and social sciences. Behavioral economics, for example,
> > > > has
> > > > > used psychology to radically reshape classical economics.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Such interdisciplinary efforts are also generating practical
> insights
> > > > > about fundamental problems like chronic illness, energy
> conservation,
> > > > > pandemic disease, intergenerational poverty and market panics. For
> > > example,
> > > > > a better understanding of the structure and function of human
> social
> > > > > networks is helping us understand which individuals within social
> > > systems
> > > > > have an outsize impact when it comes to the spread of germs or the
> > > spread
> > > > > of ideas. As a result, we now have at our disposal new ways to
> > > accelerate
> > > > > the adoption of desirable practices as diverse as vaccination in
> > rural
> > > > > villages and seat-belt use among urban schoolchildren.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is time to create new social science departments that
> > reflect the
> > > > > breadth and complexity of the problems we face as well as the
> > > > novelty of
> > > > > 21st-century science. These would include departments of biosocial
> > > science,
> > > > > network science, neuroeconomics, behavioral genetics and
> computational
> > > > > social science. Eventually, these departments would themselves be
> > > > > dismantled or transmuted as science continues to advance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Some recent examples offer a glimpse of the potential. At
> > Yale, the
> > > > > Jackson Institute for Global Affairs applies diverse social
> sciences
> > > > to the
> > > > > study of international issues and offers a new major. At
> > Harvard, the
> > > > > sub-discipline of physical anthropology, which increasingly
> > relies on
> > > > > modern genetics, was hived off the anthropology department to
> > make the
> > > > > department of human evolutionary biology. Still, such efforts are
> > > generally
> > > > > more like herds splitting up than like new species emerging. We
> > have
> > > > not
> > > > > yet changed the basic DNA of the social sciences. Failure to do
> > so
> > > might
> > > > > even result in having the natural sciences co-opt topics rightly
> > and
> > > > > beneficially in the purview of the social sciences.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > New social science departments could also help to better train
> > > students
> > > > > by engaging in new types of pedagogy. For example, in the natural
> > > sciences,
> > > > > even college freshmen do laboratory experiments. Why is this
> > rare in
> > > > the
> > > > > social sciences? When students learn about social phenomena, why
> > > > don't they
> > > > > go to the lab to examine them - how markets reach equilibrium, how
> > > people
> > > > > cooperate, how social ties are formed? Newly invented tools make
> > this
> > > > > feasible. It is now possible to use the Internet to enlist
> thousands
> > > > of
> > > > > people to participate in randomized experiments. This seems radical
> > > > only
> > > > > because our current social science departments weren't organized
> > to
> > > > teach
> > > > > this way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For the past century, people have looked to the physical and
> > > biological
> > > > > sciences to solve important problems. The social sciences offer
> > equal
> > > > > promise for improving human welfare; our lives can be greatly
> improved
> > > > > through a deeper understanding of individual and collective
> > > > behavior. But
> > > > > to realize this promise, the social sciences, like the natural
> > > sciences,
> > > > > need to match their institutional structures to today's
> intellectual
> > > > > challenges.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nicholas A. Christakis, a physician and sociologist at Yale
> > > University,
> > > > > is a co-director of the Yale Institute for Network Science.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:
> > > xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> > > > > On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 9:16 PM
> > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [xmca] Re: Luria - New Vodka Old Bottle PDF
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Greg, I think you are completely right with the way you
> > describe the
> > > > > interdisciplinary blindness inquestion. Michael Hedelberger (for
> > yet
> > > > > another example) referred to the "folk psychology" of natural
> > > scientists,
> > > > > neuroscientists in particular, when they unwittingly step
> > outside their
> > > > > discipline and talk about psychology instead of brains.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also, I think you are completely right in disagreeing with
> > > suggestions
> > > > > to replace the relevant interdisciplinary gulf with a dichotomy
> > beween
> > > > > thinking and speaking, and insisting that actions always include
> > > thinking
> > > > > and that speaking is an action. Otherwise, we are not talking about
> > > > > actions, but behaviour. Behaviour is the result of abstracting
> > > > actions away
> > > > > from consciousness. And thinking cannot be abstracted away from
> > > voluntary
> > > > > motor actions  which was the topic of Luria's book, of course.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And this is the point isn't it? Whether a sensible social science
> > > > can
> > > > > abstract from (individual) consciousness and rely only on
> > > > objectified forms
> > > > > of mind (such as the recorded word), and whether a sensible
> > > > psychology can
> > > > > absrtact away from the formative processes of the practical and
> > > material
> > > > > objectifications of thought inherited by every individual from
> their
> > > > > societal environment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andy
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Greg Thompson wrote:
> > > > > >> Michael,
> > > > > >> I'm still having a hard time figuring out how any instance of
> > > speaking
> > > > > or
> > > > > >> even thinking about speaking is not action.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> But Philip's post suggests a slightly different way of thinking
> > > about
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> discourse/action distinction.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Perhaps the discourse/action distinction is better captured by
> > > > > individual
> > > > > >> vs. group than by ideal vs. material, with discourse being
> > the group
> > > > > level
> > > > > >> phenomena that makes certain ways of thinking about things more
> > > > or less
> > > > > >> available, and action being the way that people use discourse
> > in
> > > > actual
> > > > > >> practice (and which, in the collective, becomes discourse).
> > > > Discourse is
> > > > > >> the thing that circulates in society and is instantiatable in
> > any
> > > > > >> individual instance of bringing discourse to life by action
> (whether
> > > > > >> speaking or doing).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I'd be happy to talk Treyvon, but maybe better to stick to the
> > > question
> > > > > of
> > > > > >> why a google search of "ethnographic psychology" turns up
> > only a
> > > > > handful of
> > > > > >> articles and no insitutional centers? This is a fantastic
> > idea -
> > > > so why
> > > > > >> hasn't it caught hold?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Thinking through discourse and action (which have to be two
> sides
> > > > of the
> > > > > >> same coin), "ethnographic psychology" doesn't take hold
> > because it
> > > > > doesn't
> > > > > >> fit with discourse or with action (and I would still prefer to
> > > > put these
> > > > > >> together, b.c. in academia, let's face it, if discourse isn't
> > > action,
> > > > > then
> > > > > >> we are doing a whole lotta nothing! But I'll keep them
> > separate in
> > > > > order to
> > > > > >> try them on). Where discourse includes the predominant ways of
> > > thinking
> > > > > >> about what psychology is and action involves things like
> > > > publishing in
> > > > > >> actual journals that will allow one to keep one's job. The
> > > configuration
> > > > > >> that rules out "ethnographic psychology" is thus very
> > complex. I
> > > > don't
> > > > > know
> > > > > >> that changing discourse or actions is really going to change
> > things
> > > > > unless
> > > > > >> the supports of discourse and action are altered in some way.
> > And
> > > > I
> > > > > don't
> > > > > >> think it is just one single support that can be knocked out
> (e.g.
> > > > > >> capitalism). Rather, I think there are lot of interconnecting
> > > supports
> > > > > that
> > > > > >> make "the way things are (e.g., no "ethnographic psychology")"
> > > > appear to
> > > > > >> most to be right and good and true. These include such myriad
> > > > things as
> > > > > >> language (in the broadest sense of Western languages, but
> > also in
> > > > the
> > > > > more
> > > > > >> specific sense of the arcane lingos of different disciplines),
> > > > > >> institutitutional structures ("joint" appointments remain the
> > > exception
> > > > > in
> > > > > >> most universities), sociopolitical arrangements, and, yes,
> > > capitalism.
> > > > > It
> > > > > >> isn't a perfect impenetrable Althusserian structure, some of
> > the
> > > > > supports
> > > > > >> may contain contradictions that make them prone to collapse,
> > and
> > > > others
> > > > > may
> > > > > >> be less well interconnected. This is all just to say that there
> > > > is hope,
> > > > > >> but the challenge is to identify where the shaky supports are
> > and
> > > > to
> > > > > figure
> > > > > >> out how to encourage their collapse. And I'll do my part at
> pointing
> > > > > these
> > > > > >> out.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> So, yes, discourse and action are the place to start.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -greg
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:52 PM, White, Phillip <
> > > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Michael, in response to your multiple questions here, i'm going
> > > > to
> > > > > hazard
> > > > > >>> a guess based on my experiences teaching children who are
> > > > learning a
> > > > > second
> > > > > >>> language as well as teaching teachers how to teach second
> language
> > > > > learners.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> for me, the communicative discourse drives our actions.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> when working with second language learners, when the
> > learners had
> > > > > language
> > > > > >>> supports, particularly visual and auditory, they were often
> > > > stronger in
> > > > > >>> mastering an activity.  for example, in science when
> > comparing two
> > > > > objects
> > > > > >>> and finding similarities and differences.  if on the board that
> > > > > statement
> > > > > >>> was posted, "I noticed that _____________ was similar to
> > > > > ________________
> > > > > >>> because ___________________."
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> in time, i noticed that when the teachers were learning
> teaching
> > > > > >>> strategies, and, say, i'd focus on utilizing open questions,
> > > > when i
> > > > > >>> provided them with a piece of paper with specific open question
> > > > > prompts,
> > > > > >>> they were more easily and more quickly able to change their
> > > questioning
> > > > > >>> behaviors.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> while the teachers knew the difference between a closed
> > > > question and
> > > > > an
> > > > > >>> open question, they didn't have the language structures,
> > say, on
> > > > the
> > > > > tip of
> > > > > >>> their tongue.  as time passed and they became more fluent
> > with open
> > > > > >>> questions, then they were better able to control their
> questioning
> > > > > >>> strategies, which also demanded that the students then had to
> > > respond
> > > > > with
> > > > > >>> more than "yes", "no" or other monosyllabic discourses.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> my two bits.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> phillip
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Phillip White, PhD
> > > > > >>> Urban Community Teacher Education Program
> > > > > >>> Site Coordinator
> > > > > >>> Montview Elementary, Aurora, CO
> > > > > >>> phillip.white@ucdenver.edu
> > > > > >>> or
> > > > > >>> pawhite@aps.k12.co.us
> > > > > >>> ________________________________________
> > > > > >>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> ]
> > > > On
> > > > > Behalf
> > > > > >>> Of Glassman, Michael [glassman.13@osu.edu]
> > > > > >>> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:16 PM
> > > > > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > > > >>> Subject: RE: [xmca] Re: Luria - New Vodka Old Bottle PDF
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> There is, it seems to me, a really big problem, or divide, that
> > > > has
> > > > > been
> > > > > >>> haunting the issue of communicative discourse and action.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Which is primary?  And I don't think this is a frivolous
> > > > question - and
> > > > > >>> the idea that it is in a constant cycle has a difficult time
> > > working
> > > > > >>> because the question always comes up where do we as researchers
> > > > enter
> > > > > this
> > > > > >>> cycle?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Does communicative discourse drive our actions?  And do we
> > > > change our
> > > > > >>> actions by changing communicative discourse?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Or does action drive our communicative discourse?  And we
> change
> > > > our
> > > > > >>> communicative discourse through changing our actions.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Do we change racism in America by getting people to change
> their
> > > > > >>> communicative discourse about Treyvon Martin?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Or do we get people to engage in more just actions and allow
> > > > this to
> > > > > lead
> > > > > >>> to a change in communicative discourse.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> One of the difficulties with Vygotsky, at least from my
> > view, is
> > > > that
> > > > > he
> > > > > >>> can be interpreted both ways, depending of course on what
> > you are
> > > > > reading
> > > > > >>> and level of confirmation bias.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Michael
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > *Andy Blunden*
> > > > > > Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> > > > > > Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
> > > > > > http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
>
>