Vygotsky: An Idea Analyzed Through Faith

ive recently read that vygotsky claimed learning can not take place within a “vacuum”…this is false

it should be noted that space itself has time within it- you may not have one without the other and therefore it preceeds all outcomes. if outcomes are of learning then it would be irrational to conclude that space and time are not part of the cause…if this is so then it would be irrational to conclude that learning can not take place within a “vacuum” because it is only space, when space itself underlies all learning in the first place and yet learning now (time) exists :slight_smile: …see how much faith allows for logic? or is it the other way around?? just kidding :smiley:

God created “nothing” so that a difference could be created- that which underlies all time and space

God bless

with love -hth

So are you saying that space/time has “vacuum” already within it (i.e. difference, or “nothing”), and so since all learning takes place in space/time, all learning also takes place in a vacuum?

a vacuum at its finest would be simply space- we should note that all matter has space within it and a large amount at that.
the important thing to understand is that space would need to come before matter and therefore it is irrational to conclude that learning (if it is to be based on outcomes) may not take place within a vacuum (for the reason that it is simply space) because space itself underlies all outcomes in the first place.

So space and vacuum are synonymous terms? Or at least each entity is always co-occuring, even if we are to understand the terms as designating different things?

I think you’ve grossly misunderstood the use of the word vacuum in this scenario.

Go lay in a sensory deprivation tank for 2 days straight and give us a list what you’ve learned. Not imagined, not hallucinated, not conjured between the firing of neurons. Learned.

–verb (used with object)

  1. to acquire knowledge of or skill in by study, instruction, or experience: to learn french; to learn to ski.
  2. to become informed of or acquainted with; ascertain: to learn the truth.
  3. to memorize: He learned the poem so he could recite it at the dinner.
  4. to gain (a habit, mannerism, etc.) by experience, exposure to example, or the like; acquire: She learned patience from her father.
  5. (of a device or machine, especially a computer) to perform an analogue of human learning with artificial intelligence.
  6. Nonstandard . to instruct in; teach.
    –verb (used without object)
  7. to acquire knowledge or skill: to learn rapidly.
  8. to become informed (usually followed by of ): to learn of an accident.

Your list will be (not so) suprisingly short because anything you leave that chamber with will have been conjured within your own mind because your mind would have been locked away in a ‘vacuum’ where learning is impossible.


a vacuum at its finest would be simply space correct? this could mean many things- one would want to make sure the conclusions therin after would be correct though

I have read that an absolute vacuum is physically impossible, because there is always some little energy even in “empty” space. I have also read that space itself is nothing more than the extension of matter (energy), that the definition of space, what it means to be space is simply: “there is matter (energy) here”. The idea of empty space is a contradiction in terms, physically speaking. Or so says the more modern quantum and relativistic explanations that have supplanted the old Newtonian framework (which did indeed conceive of space as essentially empty vacuum).

so the aether is back? …you will supply me and i will only explain it differently- yet it will not change in reason