These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
On 17 January 2012 12:55, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote: > Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> That's another point of disagreement. It seems as plain as day to me that >> personal experience participates from the outset. >> Bye for now, >> Huw >> >> > This is the point, Huw. Vygotsky is studying i*deal- typical paths of > development*, not categories of mental entity. > > Actually, there's a passage in the Vasilyuk I sent around before which > explains this general methodological point in a slightly different context, > very well; > > “The most direct cause of this lack of acceptance [of ANL’s thesis > that a motive is the object which stimulates activity] was that > commentators saw the thesis not as meaningful abstraction but as a > generalisation from empirically observed facts on stimulation of > activity, to be verified by direct reference to those facts. If in > the process of such reference even one fact appeared which did not > fit in with the idea of activity being stimulated by an object > corresponding to a need, then the idea could be discarded as not in > accord with the facts, or at most not fully satisfactory” (p. 85). > > If I explained to you the concept of convergence of an infinite series, it > may well be that you had already had personal experience of infinite series > and their convergence in your day-to-day life (though I don't know how). > But this still does not negate the idea of a scientific concept as an > ideal-typical path of development which begins from a verbal definition, > and not from everyday sensorimotor experience. > The path of acquiring a concept is not the concept. The flight of a moth and is not light. Huw > Andy > > > > > ______________________________**____________ > _____ > xmca mailing list > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca> > __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca