These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,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These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,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.
Jack I appreciate your comments and reflections. You wrote: I've been exploring the implications of the above ideas in enquiries of the kind, 'How do I improve this process of education here?' whilst bearing Wittgenstein's points in mind: Wittgenstein, L. (1958) Philosophical Investigations. Oxford; Basil Blackwell. 410. "I" is not the name of a person, nor "here" of a place, and "this" is not a name. But they are connected with names. Names are explained by means of them. It is also true that it is characteristic of physics not to use these words. Jack, I believe these insights have a profound level of understanding for working within the ZPD. John Shotter's ventriloquating Wittgenstein's understanding that 3rd person accounts are PRESENTED in the 1st person. [as gestures] In other words our re-presentations [our pictures] are presented [1st person with joint action [2nd person] in ANTICIPATION of potentially "moving" another. In other words, in our activities and actions we are always already "permeated" by otherness and dialogical othering [as a verb]. The question which needs to be asked is if THIS tradition [tacit presentations] is "merely interactional" as Andy suggests or is it potentially possible to expand this interactional "picture" to also engaged cultural HISTORICAL ARTIFACTS [tools language symbols] within THIS presentational understanding. Presentations which are tacitly shared while participating in "joint action" or dialogical enactments. I read John Shotter as developing a particular cultural "disposition" [which is cultivated]. Reflecting on the way 2nd person "joint enactments" [Shotter's language] of 1st person "tacit" presentations AS IF enactments OF 3rd person objectifications [as particular ways to take a stance or position within living phronesis]. THIS presentation represents "skillful learned enactments as ways of "reading" others and being permeated within othering enactments in a particular "way". Human enactments not as causal re-presentations but rather enactments as anticipatory presentations within "events" which are future oriented. Jack, I will access the sites you have shared and look forward to how others are working within THIS tradition. I "sense" intuitively that when working within fluid ZPD THIS way of understanding the relation of learning [as dispositions or ways of orienting] may be productive. Larry Larry I would like to add the word "not" to how we On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 2:42 AM, Jack Whitehead <jack@actionresearch.net>wrote: > > I've been exploring the implications of the above ideas in enquiries of > the kind, 'How do I improve this process of education here?' whilst bearing > Wittgenstein's points in mind: > Wittgenstein, L. (1958) Philosophical Investigations. Oxford; Basil > Blackwell. > > 410. "I" is not the name of a person, nor "here" of a place, and > > "this" is not a name. But they are connected with names. Names are > > explained by means of them. It is also true that it is characteristic of > > physics not to use these words. > __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca