Vygotsky's theory and the right to fly
To Sara, who led me to know Vygotsky's theory: We can fly. The only difficulty with this Is knowing if we have skills with our wings. Many people like me have listened to that for a long time. It happened while I lived with my parents and in all the periods that I was a student: You can fly.
So it followed like a radio advertisement between music. To me, it was a measure of
caution and torture. I had this sensation often when I lived alone, and that came again and again.
I will need a keystone to open my understanding.
I am trying to understand why. People repeated it, and the worst never had a terminus, increased and with many similar ways of saying.
Grows and appears.
Opens their wings.
The sky is for a few.
You need to arrange a way to clean your life, Ok.
Try to take a lesson from that.
Why not go from here?
The world is like an orange flying in heaven.
Could you make a schedule and then put your priority in that? Never had I given importance to it, but I continued listening. Possible is a thought. Life passes flying. A time is all that can be put off but not come back. Save time. Looks around.
I paid attention but always heard phrases like these: You need to seek something to do. You always need to do right. Have focus. Try again. Remember you can fly. Get organized, put things in place, and at least have a schedule, a personal diary of things to do, and a plan for staying on the trail of personal realization.
It is life, as it really can be. It goes and flies. We are still experiencing a social and cultural crisis, in which to get raw material for transformation in tools, it is necessary to be fast, sound, and able. Tools for what? How do you think you could use that? Who will teach you? Why? For what? Is it useful, and what utility does it have?
How much time is needed to reproduce it?
Is it possible?
You know, fly?
Relations and interactions are necessary to develop your mind.
Taylor shortened the time to make the facilities help workers to produce more rapidly. The social space from work organized would facilitate things, and this would increase capital increases, with an effort more minor.
They are earning above with low investment.
He searched to solve the time question for production, no to workers feeling good. It is optional, like today. To see if this worked, he did tests to prove his thesis. And to know if people could work more and produce more, noticed that they were not imported with local conditions, only the liberty of relationships and interaction with colleagues. It was perfect. The work conditions would not have influenced production. It was essential human support, the own human coexistence.
You can socialize with people through communication and interaction.
Will it be possible?
Does maintain the basic that we achieve the superior level without that they know. Why does the condition not influence production? Altogether it was better. Less expensive.
The excellent working conditions of the facilities in the workspace help, but what would impulse the production making the workers produce more, was the social relations and interactions.
What would make people work harder was their social life. He noticed that people performed better, and it did not affect production. And it is through relationships and interactions that we learn. The workers' life was related to production and capital gain. The workers were fine even if they were not fine. The welfare in a social sense was sufficient.
It was cheap.
The human being works better-having liberty for social relations and interactions, the same thinking in Vygotsky's theory where he appoints that social learning is more effective with other persons. The construction of affective memory comes from social experience in social relationships. It permits an increase in moral values and a personal sense of dignity. It is where new subjectivities are possible: the socialization between people, the placements, decisions, a taste of life, the self-esteem, and the interactions for learning and understanding to promote creativity—identity with the ambient meaning coexistence with others.
Suddenly someone starts to clean the place, improves the aspect and with better means to carry out their daily activities. The tool that is needed all the time is near the worker and close to a numbered shelf. Before, it was an exigency ruled with normalization and punishment:
Silence, straightness, application, focus, speed, agility, and efficiency.
The techniques to create an apparent positive would say that social atmosphere life is like a welfare guarantee, with more production. It was proven that social liberty in education enables the development of new thoughts and new knowledge with concepts that become collective and available because human growth means ethical values that are not for one but all. However, the intent of pragmaticist scientists was, in the end, the production.
The Vygotsky thesis was a discovery for Taylor through capitalist production bias. What is good in this case is not a measure of suffering searched to human work. But the discovery of the other is essential to the sense of life. In addition to that is the ability to work, appropriation of tools, and equipment, technical learning, and the work ensure future, among other necessary things.
On the other hand, like a mattress, a cushion against resentment, social relationships created artificially produce pleasant weather. They can cherish the pain and anguish of stressful work—a conformability with a vivificated situation, an acceptance of conditions offered. However, the natural coexistence in social conditions increases the intellectual capacity for discernment. A democratic view of others cannot be legal only. A technique is necessary to validate that with feelings, emotions, and social values.
The worker's individuality also can denounce mistreatment, corruption, and suffering and seek justice, even in putting an end to entities, private or public organizations.
Where did the justice at that time?
The relations and interactions in society increase a sense of identity with moral rules, empowering the singularities to offer them an ethic that transforms them into dignified beings.
Humans learn together while living together. Human life is eminently social. We may have many expectations for our glorious children, so, unsurprisingly, some have periods of stress. Surprisingly, they are only what we believe, being only our belief.
How are we going to know?
In a simple experience called alterity, we put ourselves in their place. It is not suitable for us, but essential for discovery, knowing that we are not good parents, or that we are those that eat nails and destroy people, exaggerated expectations from them, or that we are only unmovable traditionalists. My God has a priest in my garden. Am I, Mom? Places are specific to things, forks, knives, vases, and room positions.
The way of building a house, which mostly stays the same, does not change much. Not long ago, there was the dungeon, the maid's room. This rancidity persists. It is now that this kind of relationship between objectified things and people came from human history. I like her because she is blonde. It is grotesque. Or still, she is like him because he is tall and looks like someone from the west; or prefers these shoes, better, is made of chrome, handmade, I do not know, I think I like them.
Tastes come from cultural relationships. Love happens after we do an evaluation. We use analog data by comparability. In a way, we wear the uniform of a football team. Players are protecting a territory. What is a separation in ubiquity as a corpus of military division? There is also the division of knowledge in the area and the division of time to occupy activities. Time to work, time to study, time for whatever fills the day and night. Sun follows its trajectory. It divides our world with luminosity creating night and day - but for a bit of time; therefore, we believe that is much.
The time is like the Shiva dancing in a circle, the gear of production and smashing of life. Analogical and comparative, the Ecclesiastes account and divide the time as the world was made in temporal pieces. And it is correct and natural.
Division
The division came because the world was dangerous. People's divisions by different human races, forms, origins, influence, power, social classes, some social scale, and values must always be taken care of and adjusted. The people are different. What is equal is an abstraction, a projection of perfection. It does not exist. It seems akin to another by similarity - it comes from Lat. Semen. It seems to be the same, but it does not.
Every populated space with similarities seeks rights and equality, but we do not have that in the world. First, we need time for adaptation concerning space, human relations, and the use of tools. What is the difference? Behavior, the use of labels, the honor translated into the marks, the absurd importance of origin, race, form, and content.
The human existence by similarity is the work uniform and team t-shirt. The rest is competition today.
Playing football is an exercise in dominating a territory.
So, love, respect, and affectivity exchange are different ways of thinking. The quest of each team is to seek a goal, the team members make what is necessary for that, and a condition is to share the following strategies to overcome difficulties and reach the goal: belonging as a member of a structure, understanding the position into the field in the actuation camp with obedience to coach.
The essential is understanding the game to apply what was learned in life, passing the ball with confidence and respect for another believing conquest goal together, is playing in a double sense - attack and defense.
The uniform and its signs, accent into voices, and idiosyncrasy show cultural language, and a revelation of the social being, in the microcosm of the civilization, by equivalence with a group can see that. Little differences appear in a gesture, look away, and taste what could be said as appropriation signals of culture create some identity with belonging emerging a desire for rest, throwing us into a space of balanced relationships.
Thinking in a community, we could know all social rules, a place or a group where we say whatever and be understood because it would be possible for us to live far away from that contradictory and dangerous world holding hands, and not necessary to have your own opinion, to think, only follow the normative.
Nothing could be no-good, and nothing happens there and in our life. We can rest. The world is good, peaceful, and safe for us.
We seek a life team, dividing work and reward like Pavlov's dogs, a master says what we must do, and someone commands us. It can be a culture into a closed community, ruled and auto-determined, a social identity group socialism in that we play with rabbits and lions, a paradise on the earth.
We would be care dogs, protected against differences. Of course, the dogs in this psychologist's experience also made him obey.
When they wanted food, they salivated, rang the bell, and behaved as they trained. The communitarianism, we are against the world and its differences.
We would have the same uniform, clothes, and souls. We would live with our instinctive sense of union. Good dogs receive good food. And we would be fed forever.
In communitarianism, we are against the world and its differences. We have the same uniform, clothes, and souls. We are happy dogs with wagging tails.
We would be technically educated and focused on subjects, focusing on what we must do. Pavlov's dogs were trained - and needed to be educated. Education would require independence, not codependency.
Like an orchestra, the king, chief, president, government, administration, and other authorities set time with the boat conductor to try to organize and control the society. Descartes' methodology - Discourse of the Method - shows how to do division and how to be applied in our lives. We had that experience in history with feudalism, fascism, nations, patriotism, and fundamentalism from any species. In contradiction to Darwin apart, the law of the strong down by the floor.
The division between weak and strong is the task of David against Goliath. The empire that organizes itself and cancels singularities has erased life and corresponds to the side of the strongest. Each singular is potentially a David. It is simple, comparative, analogical superficial, and does not correspond with academic research. However, it shows the unbalance between organizing our life or laissez-faire, leaving for later, living in a disorganized system, something anarchic and not personal.
Descartes' methodology - Discourse of the Method - shows how to do division and how to be applied in our lives. We had that experience in history with feudalism, fascism, nations, patriotism, and fundamentalism from any species. In contradiction to Darwin apart, the law of the strong down by the floor.
The division between weak and strong is the task of David against Goliath. The empire that organizes itself and cancels singularities has erased life and corresponds to the side of the strongest. Each singular is potentially a David. It is simple, comparative, analogical superficial, and does not correspond with academic research. However, it shows the unbalance between organizing our life or laissez-faire, leaving for later, living in a disorganized system, something anarchic and not personal.
The concepts are like Pavlov's dogs, dominated by a constant feed exchange, obedience, and food. When we do not feed them, we break an exchange system. They will come back to what they were. If we left to do the same with others - clients, friends, children, etc. - we would have some surprises. When the master exchanges food by obedience, the trained dogs, in the same way, master that master.
They make the obedience good of business and request similar behavior from him. Nothing happens alone. Each thing in that plan is bound with the other taking a thing is like a thing to hold us. Give and receive are the same in that context. In this sense, the technicism ideology of training (by repetition), which is very different from significant learning from Vygotsky in both cases, passes the knowledge. Sometimes, we can only do what the dogs would do. At other times we create our path through what can be in human life: do ask. To do questions, and we wonder if trying to do something different. We are animals like dogs, but we are potentially good like them. To be like the dog is a step to goodness - I believe that like Freud, Trotsky, or Quincas Borba - narrative by Machado de Assis, we would be who we are, and what are we? What want we? I do not know, but we are not dependent beings. We are unconditionally free to make options and construct our rights to make choices. Through Vygotsky's theory believe that we can fly like knowledge shared.
#######
Bessie got there, and she lives away in the paradise of dogs.
Bessie
********
