These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes, and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.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These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes, and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.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.

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

Re: [xmca] The "Inner Form" of the Word

I would if I had the time now, but I need to get a book written, and it's hard to find time to work on that.
Besides, I've done a review of 3 other books that was accepted and has been "in the cue" now for (I'm guessing) something like four years now (you got it from me back then, Mike.) I can't afford doing that again.
Actually, for this book, I think MCA needs someone who knows the Russians better than I do. 

On Sat, 28 May 2011, mike cole wrote:


Seems like you should review it for MCA, Tony!
mike

On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Tony Whitson <twhitson@udel.edu> wrote:


For whatever it might be worth to anybody by way of a testimonial:

After reading (& marking up) the first two chapters, I bought a second copy
that I can keep clean for sharing pages, passages, etc.

On Sat, 28 May 2011, mike cole wrote:

 Tony-- I have written to David to see if he has any texts, short of

everyone
running out and buying his book (which I am sure he would not object to!),
that could guide our
discussion. His article in the Vygotsky companion ends with "in place of a
conclusion" and a warning not to cleanse Vygotsky of "rationalistic
tendencies."

Part of my unease in this discussion has been the binary nature of the
terms
used, even as those using them believe in a basically trinary organization
of humaness.

mike

On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Tony Whitson <twhitson@udel.edu> wrote:

 Thanks, Martin


 From a Peircean perspective, there seems to be a falsely exhaustive



 dichotomy here between the ["laws of reason"]-logical and the

psycho-logical. The semio-logical is not reducible to either of those.

Again, I think that Bakhurst's _The Formation of Reason_ is very much on
point here. While he's not using Peirce, he is using Vygotsky et al.
along
with the Bildung tradition, which is all about forming within culture,
but
not [I would argue] as a matter of something merely psycho-logical.






Tony Whitson
UD School of Education
NEWARK  DE  19716

twhitson@udel.edu
_______________________________

"those who fail to reread
 are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
                  -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca