Commodious
发表于 2025-3-27 00:38:20
http://reply.papertrans.cn/16/1505/150406/150406_31.png
ambivalence
发表于 2025-3-27 04:03:06
http://reply.papertrans.cn/16/1505/150406/150406_32.png
intertwine
发表于 2025-3-27 08:16:00
http://reply.papertrans.cn/16/1505/150406/150406_33.png
peak-flow
发表于 2025-3-27 11:10:42
https://doi.org/10.1007/11374343about change more generally, yields fallacious theories. The example of thinking about a movement, such as the drawing of a line, in terms of consecutive states clearly shows that movement does not come back from still photographs even if we were to take more and more of them within the same time pe
blackout
发表于 2025-3-27 16:07:18
http://reply.papertrans.cn/16/1505/150406/150406_35.png
个人长篇演说
发表于 2025-3-27 18:53:06
https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0042035eorized as sign(ifier) things that refer to something else. The apotheosis of this approach exists in/as the Theory of Knowledge Objectification (Radford 2013), which holds that knowledge is externalized in mathematical forms that can be shared within groups of individuals. These mathematical forms
FIN
发表于 2025-3-27 22:01:05
https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0042035course that is used so often that it does not appear to require any further explanation. A particular problem arises from the fact that the term is used in many different ways, doing a lot of different theoretical work (e.g., Nöth 1990). This exclusive semantic focus on the meaning of words also was
烦忧
发表于 2025-3-28 03:41:27
https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0042035could the monadic individuals of constructivism ever construct their own forms of behavior (practices) so that they are recognizably the same as the behaviors of contemporaries. How could such behaviors manifest continuity along a historical route of the field or discipline? One recent study in math
江湖骗子
发表于 2025-3-28 09:29:02
http://reply.papertrans.cn/16/1505/150406/150406_39.png
北京人起源
发表于 2025-3-28 10:33:42
https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0042035les (scientific psychology) or to cultural principles (interpretive psychology). To this date, as some critics note, little has changed. This is so because even in those circles where scholars are concerned with the “enacted” and “embodied” mind, the specters of Cartesianism loom: Mind is thought of