Psychologized Language in Education:

Denaturalizing a Regime of Truth 1st

Edition Zvi Bekerman
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/psychologized-language-in-education-denaturalizing-
a-regime-of-truth-1st-edition-zvi-bekerman/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

In Search of Truth Sharon Wray

https://ebookmass.com/product/in-search-of-truth-sharon-wray/

Doing Qualitative Research in Language Education 1st

ed. Edition Seyyed-Abdolhamid Mirhosseini

https://ebookmass.com/product/doing-qualitative-research-in-
language-education-1st-ed-edition-seyyed-abdolhamid-mirhosseini/

Science Culture, Language, and Education in America 1st

ed. Edition Emily Schoerning

https://ebookmass.com/product/science-culture-language-and-
education-in-america-1st-ed-edition-emily-schoerning/

Critical Issues in Teaching English and Language

Education: International Research Perspectives Salah
Troudi

https://ebookmass.com/product/critical-issues-in-teaching-
english-and-language-education-international-research-
perspectives-salah-troudi/
The Historical and Philosophical Significance of Ayer’s
Language, Truth and Logic 1st Edition Adam Tamas Tuboly

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-historical-and-philosophical-
significance-of-ayers-language-truth-and-logic-1st-edition-adam-
tamas-tuboly/

Innovative Practices in Early English Language

Education David Valente

https://ebookmass.com/product/innovative-practices-in-early-
english-language-education-david-valente/

Investments 12th Edition Zvi Bodie

https://ebookmass.com/product/investments-12th-edition-zvi-bodie/

In Search of Truth Sharon Wray

https://ebookmass.com/product/in-search-of-truth-sharon-wray-3/

In Search of Truth Sharon Wray

https://ebookmass.com/product/in-search-of-truth-sharon-wray-2/
PSYCHOLOGIZED
LANGUAGE
IN Denaturalizing a Regime of Truth
Zvi Bekerman and Michalinos Zembylas

EDUCATION
Psychologized Language in Education
Zvi Bekerman • Michalinos Zembylas

Psychologized
Language in
Education
Denaturalizing a Regime of Truth
Zvi Bekerman Michalinos Zembylas
The Seymour Fox School of Open University of Cyprus
Education, Melton Center Latsia, Cyprus
The Hebrew University
Jerusalem, Israel

ISBN 978-1-137-54936-5    ISBN 978-1-137-54937-2 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54937-2

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017954928

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the pub-
lisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the
material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institu-
tional affiliations.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Nature America Inc.
The registered company address is: 1 New York Plaza, New York, NY 10004, U.S.A.
The reality, which is the transition from childhood to manhood, has slipped
between our fingers. We have only the imaginary stops “child” and man, and we
are very near to saying that one of these stops is the other […]. The truth is that if
language here were moulded on reality, we should not say “The child becomes the
man,” but “There is becoming from the child to the man.” In the first proposition,
“becomes” is a verb of indeterminate meaning, intended to mask the absurdity
into which we fall when we attribute the state “man” to the subject “child.” […]
In the second proposition, “becoming” is a subject. It comes to the front. It is the
reality itself; childhood and manhood are then only possible stops, mere views of
the mind; we now have to do with the objective movement itself […]. But the first
manner of expression is alone conformable to our habits of language. We must, in
order to adopt the second, escape from the […] mechanism of thought. […] The
reason is that there is more in the transition than the series of states, that is to say,
the possible cuts-more in the movement than the series of positions, that is to say,
the possible stops. Only, the first way of looking at things is conformable to the
processes of the human mind; the second requires, on the contrary, that we reverse
the bent of our intellectual habits (Bergson, 1911).

v
 Preface

Disclaimer
(In case there is anyone out there)
Dear reader:
If someone ever tells you he or she is writing something new in the
social sciences and the humanities, doubt them. Almost for sure they are
secluded in their fields of study and/or have not studied enough history.
We live in a world in which being ‘original’ (from Latin orı̄gin-, orı̄gō
ancestry, coming into being, beginning) is not only misunderstood but
also overrated. What we wrote in the book you hold in your hands is not
‘new’ (not even the dialogues between the King and the Slave, which we
hope you will find clarifying as well as entertaining); it touches upon issues
that have been discussed throughout history, numerous times, in multiple
regions of the world, and by many people, most of whom our ethnocen-
trism will not allow us to know. We know about the things we wrote a
little from what has been written in the intellectual traditions to which we
belong, and we have dared here and there to look a little bit more in some
other places. The book is not an attempt to exhaust any philosophical
dispute; it is just a small attempt to keep alive, in and for the field of educa-
tion, some ideas that we believe need to be ‘re-membered’, if we are seri-
ous about bettering educational institutions. By educational institutions,
we mean, for the most part, schools. We realize there is a danger in gener-
alizing and we realize that our critique might not apply in similar ways to
all schools. Yet, we believe our critique applies to the so-called developed
political economies, neoliberal enterprises that promote individual self-­
interest over the common good and the market as the arbiter of values and

vii
viii PREFACE

have been ascendant, moving across regions and national systems for too
long a time.
We believe psychology as a discipline has its problems and a rather
problematic beginning in its attempts to ‘imitate’ too closely the so-called
hard sciences (Samelson, 1978), but we also know other disciplines have
also had a similarly problematic beginning, such as anthropology. Yet
anthropology ended up taking a different direction, making some valuable
contributions towards the understanding of that which is human. We hesi-
tate to say the same for some branches of psychology, not because they
haven’t made contributions to an understanding of that which is human,
but rather because this understanding has ‘colonized’ all others with tre-
mendous consequences, especially for education. Our book is about that
psychology that has taken grip of education and more so about folk psy-
chology: the psychology that has invaded education and some of the psy-
chology research that still dominates educational policy, prescribing certain
solutions for new and perennial problems. When we do refer to psychol-
ogy in this book, then, we refer to psychology as the psychologization of
problems and solutions in education; therefore, we want to be careful
about not targeting the field of psychology as such. In fact, we anticipate
that some of the arguments we make will not be too far off from similar
positions emerging from some branches of psychology, such as social or
critical psychology.
We develop our arguments from within an empirical discourse; we do
realize other discourses are available and legitimate, but we worry about
these discourses mixing within academic and educational settings. The
things we worry about the most are the metaphors that accompany the
analytical concepts we devise to make inquiries, in our case in the field of
education. As is the case, more often than not, these concepts do not
remain merely as metaphors; they often become methods and practices
that guide educational aims and policies. More specifically, we worry about
concepts that create dualities such as mind/body and reason/emotion in
that which is human. We believe such dualities to stand at the basis of
many of the problems of school education nowadays, despite repeated
efforts to dismantle these dualities in recent years and offer different meta-
phors, as well as practices that try to overcome these dualities. As in any
other field, in education, many of the predominant concepts and their
subsequent metaphors have been gradually naturalized (e.g., self, identity,
mind, learning, etc.) so much so that we have stopped reflecting critically
on them. Our purpose in this book is to make another attempt to
 PREFACE
   ix

­ enaturalize them so as to encourage a persistent reflection on our educa-

d
tional activity in schools. Needless to say, any of the subjects we raise could
become a book in itself, which does not necessarily focus on education,
but our goal here has been to try and combine them together while focus-
ing on the educational arena.
We are afraid we fail to understand how educators (at all levels) who if,
god forbid, would be in need of surgery, would never agree to be operated
by an ‘intelligent’ physician with multiple ‘cognitive abilities’, but lacking
experience in the practice of surgery, give up so easily on issues related to
education and talk about it on the basis of intelligence or cognitive abili-
ties rather than on the basis of practice. We are concerned with the psy-
chologization and fetishization of concepts such as ‘identity’, ‘culture’,
‘emotion’ and ‘mind’ and we think this is happening to the detriment of
children’s learning and well-being.
Even if we are, to a small extent, successful in presenting our views in
lucid terms, what we hope to remedy is grounded in and sustained by the
very material unequal allocation of resources in our present neoliberal glo-
balized world—more than in any metaphors or false epistemologies in the
‘heads’ of troubled individuals. Yet, giving up is not an option, especially
under the present circumstances; so for what it’s worth, we want to engage
you, the reader, in ‘remembering’ some important ideas.
We want you to remember some basic stuff regarding science and what
it is we can expect to know through it. That central to the scientific enter-
prise is experience and that experience is what comes to us through our
senses. Although we have sensory limitations, to overcome this we cannot
give in to reaching decisions based on non-available to the senses data
(though for a while this might be necessary because of some hypothesis we
may have, yet we cannot keep doing this forever). Some sensory limita-
tions can ultimately be overcome only by developing better instruments
(e.g., telescopes or microscopes), which will enable us to observe the yet
unobserved (if it is indeed there in some way or other).
We are of course aware of the multiple perspectives through which
measurement has been approached conceptually, metaphysically, semanti-
cally and epistemologically. Yet, it seems that for all, in one way or another,
measurement is the hallmark of science and involves interaction with the
concrete and not the assumed; measurement cannot be derived from
unobservable phenomena (Tal, 2015). When it is, it makes that which
needs to be explained the centerpiece of our work and thus turns science
into faith (faith is not wrong or necessarily bad, it is just not science).
x PREFACE

We argue that educational research and present educational language,

so much influenced by psychological jargon, is for the most part mislead-
ing, for it is not scientifically rigorous enough and it is based on things that
need to be explained rather than used as explanations, and it is this that we
want to change. We are concerned about students adopting a language
that has no concrete referents, the language of mind, intelligence, identity,
motivation, and so on. It is our view that this language leads us in wrong
directions, looking for solutions in the ‘inside’ of individuals, who become
the focus of our attempts at bettering the world of education, while losing
sight of the complex web of contextual interactions within which these
individuals evolve and in which the identified problems make sense and
the ways in which these organize possible solutions. In short, we want to
invite you to carefully review the language we use in education, the meta-
phors that guide us through the use of this language and most of all to
move away from static, reified conceptualizations to more active, social
understanding of what education is all about.

References
Samelson, F. (1978). From “race psychology” to “studies in prejudice”:
Some observations on the thematic reversal in social psychology. Journal
of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 14(3), 265–278.
Tal, E. (2015). Measurement in science. Retrieved October 30, 2016
from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2015/entries/measurement-
science
 Contents

1 Introduction   1

Part I Review of Psychologized Discourses in Education   9

2 Schooling in the Western World  11

3 Dualisms  21

4 Mind Blowing–Blowing Mind  33

5 Individuate, Divide and Reign  41

6 The Self (Intensive Adjective or Being) Authentic,

Hiding or Material?  51

7 Identity  57

8 Emotion, Emotional Intelligence and Motivation  67

xi
xii CONTENTS

9 Culture, a Modern Cage?  79

10 Making Sense of Language  85

11 Meaning Not Exact  99

Part II Some Possibilities to Overcome Psychologized

Language 107

12 The Psychologized Approach Reviewed 109

13 The Materialist Critique 119

14 Learning/Knowledge and Schooling 135

15 Abandoning Our Fixation with the Individual Mind:

The Path Beyond Psychologized Language 149

16 The Work of Learning, the Learning of Work 167

17 Conclusion 187

Index 205
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

It must have happened to you. As many do today, you have gone to school
and found yourself in a situation in which you had a test and your good
friend did better. You might have wondered what is wrong with you (Am
I a loser? You might have asked yourself), you might have even been envi-
ous of your friend (the winner at this point) and might even wished to be
him. He is more ‘intelligent’, faster in grasping stuff and able to under-
stand things you do not, you must have said to yourself. When thinking all
these things, you might have been only rehearsing things you have heard
from others. Teachers and parents—adults in general—narrate similar
events in the world in this way. You could easily attend a parent-teacher
meeting in which a teacher shares with a parent the fact that she finds her
daughter ‘not very intelligent’, not able to grasp with ease very difficult
tasks. These words sound ‘natural’ to us; we do not think of them as ideo-
logical rhetoric, a way of speaking, but we believe them to be ‘true’
descriptions of a student’s abilities.
At another point in life, you might have been in a more fortunate situ-
ation, one in which you get the better grade and become the object of
envy. Things stay much the same, but now it is you who is more ‘intelli-
gent’, faster in grasping and able to better understand complex things. It
is those others now who are not. Little has changed; however, now it is
you and not your friend who feels better.

© The Author(s) 2018 1

Z. Bekerman, M. Zembylas, Psychologized Language in Education,
https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54937-2_1
2 1 INTRODUCTION

This book is about these words, what they do to us and what we do with
them. It is about what happens when we take these words as proper under-
standings of the world and those involved in it and about these words as
properly explaining what goes on in the world and with us, while inhabit-
ing it.
Feeling to be a loser or a winner in the events just described debilitates
or strengthens your sense of who you are. ‘Debilitate’ or ‘strengthen’, pay
attention, are very similar words; they just work in different directions.
They need each other in their absence and both are assumed to work on
something inside you, something that is not totally clear what it is. As if
who you are is other than what you do, a duality, which though difficult
to sustain, seems very real to all of us today, at least in the Western world.
The ‘who we really are’ comes in different labels: self, identity, individual,
personality, you name it. We even add to them adjectives, the self/iden-
tity/individual/personality can be ‘authentic’ or not, ‘stable’ or not, ‘per-
nicious’ or not, ‘intelligent’ or not, but for whatever they are, we seem not
to doubt they are real.
We also have theories as to how this ‘who we really are’ becomes.
Depending on our philosophical and psychological inclinations or under-
standings, we might assume that the ‘who we really are’ was there before
we came into being or is the result of our development after becoming.
Again, here the only difference is one of genesis; the ‘who we really are’
may have been there from our inception or it is a becoming after birth. At
times, not really knowing the product of which exactly is the ‘who we
really are’, we settle for an integrative approach and we agree that it is
dependent on both—nature and nurture. People around us use these
words (e.g., self/identity/individual/personality); although these words,
in their present meaning, are relatively recent in human history, they are
used as if they express a truth that should not be doubted.
This book is about these words too, about what we do with them and
what they do to us. It is about what happens when we take these words as
proper understandings of the world and those involved in it and about
these words as properly explaining what goes on in the world and with us
while inhabiting it.
We are still in the same class, but this time you and your friend are not
taking a test but rather reading a text. The teacher asks you to explain
what you have ‘understood’ from the text and, hesitantly, you offer an
answer to which the teacher reacts kindly, while hinting that you might
not have properly understood the text. Your friend offers a different
 1 INTRODUCTION 3

answer to which the teacher reacts by pointing at the clarity and exactness
of the answer. Nevertheless, you still think that your answer, though not
the only possible answer, is a correct one (at least for you and that you can
explain why it is correct consistently), you choose to keep quiet and regis-
ter in your notes the answer offered by your friend. The teacher seems to
know better and you believe she must be right; like it or not, teachers are
higher in the school hierarchy and what they believe to be ‘true’ might
have consequences for your standing in school. Again, you feel somewhat
miserable hoping some day you will be as ‘intelligent’ and ‘knowledge-
able’ as your friend. Again, you have a sense of your ‘self’ or ‘identity’
being weakened. Being told you do not ‘understand’, that you do not
‘know’, that you do not ‘learn’ well enough is not helpful in strengthening
your sense of ‘self’. It could have been the other way around and then it
would have been your friend the one struggling with a sense of insecurity,
with a weakened identity or a debilitated self. If you come to think about
it, ‘knowing’ and ‘understanding’ are not clear concepts, though they are
brought up in multiple contexts by many (teachers, parents, and adults in
general)—contexts that many times correspond with situations where
blame or hierarchies are being produced, while never being exposed as
part of the scene.
This book is about these words too, about what they do to us and what
we do with them. It is about what happens when we take these words as
proper descriptions of what is happening in the world and with those
involved in it and about these words as properly explaining what goes on
in the world and with us while inhabiting it.
These words make assumptions about individual students and what
there is allegedly inside of them—identities, selves, emotions, minds and
even understandings (at least when dealing with literary texts)—none of
which have yet been empirically shown to exist as such. Has anyone ‘seen’
or ‘touched’ an identity? How does it look? Has anyone ever ‘seen’ or
‘touched’ an ‘understanding’ of something? Yet, we speak as if they exist.
We are even told they have been measured. However, the most we have on
these concepts are reports by self or others. Reports can indeed be mea-
sured, but these measures should not be taken as anything other than the
measure of these same reports and not the things reported about (be these
‘intelligence’ or ‘identity’, and so on.) People do indeed talk about their
identities and understandings. Reports are empirical indeed but do not
make these concepts any more real. Yet, these concepts ceaselessly serve
educational and general discourses as if they were facts.1
4 1 INTRODUCTION

Yet (again), the same teacher in conversation with other teachers in the
teachers’ room might, while discussing you and your friend as being ‘suc-
cessful’ or ‘failing’ students, shift the focus from you or your friend to your
families and their ethnic/cultural background. When doing so, if you have
the opportunity of hearing the conversation without being seen, you
might be relieved knowing now the problem is not yours, but your fami-
ly’s or your family’s group—your ‘culture’, ‘ethnicity’ or ‘group’. In this
case, ‘relief’ is for the failing student; the successful one might be sad-
dened, for now what was apparently his achievement, it is his family’s and
not his own anymore. Pondering on the relief, critically, the failing student
might realize that for the sake of his functioning in the school, or better
say, the school functioning on him, the shift from individual to group
culture makes no great difference for though the mistake is now inter-
preted as the result of a ‘village’, the many not the individual, the grade is
still only in his individual record.
The book is about these (fuzzy) words too—culture, group, ethnicity—
about what we do with them and what they do to us. It is about what hap-
pens when we take these words as proper descriptions of what is happening
in the world and with those involved in it and about these words as prop-
erly explaining what goes on in the world and with us while inhabiting it.
Schools are scenarios where multiple scenes are enacted, a few of which
we have recreated already. Schools do more than that. At the structural
level, they separate the novice student from the family, they compartmen-
talize knowledge, and they abstract that knowledge from the sites of its
practical implementation (Cole, 2005). Parents in the morning may drop
their children at schools, but they are not usually allowed to stay with
them. If you are a teacher, there are little chances you will end up teaching
any of your children if they attend the same school. The fact that you
might be biased and the strong individualizing tendencies of the school
would require you not to teach them. School is the place where we learn
about disciplines and disciplinary boundaries as if physics and history
would be unrelated and separated by natural borders (we know borders
are never natural—Mignolo & Tlostanova, 2006). Since school is a central
link in the naturalization of abstraction, teaching about ‘things’ is con-
fused many times with the ‘thing’ itself—economics in school has little to
do with the ‘real’ world market. School in general seems to stand strongly
behind the idea that if students learn ‘about’ things, they will end up being
able to do the things themselves, with ease. Therefore, in schools we are
taught that words have meanings and we are taught contents of texts or
 1 INTRODUCTION 5

disciplines, thus reflecting the same dualism we mentioned earlier between

the student (assumingly his physical body) and his self (identity/personal-
ity/individuality); what is different this time is that instead of having a
body that carries a mind, we get a text that carries content or meaning in
a dualistic relation that when you come to think about it would be difficult
to empirically sustain.
Last but not least, schools are places where error is documented, classi-
fied, reported; error, that which is the basis of all replication and thus of
evolution, becomes anathema in schools. Error is not any more the source
of innovation but the mark of failure (Villarreal & Witzany, 2013).
The book is about these (fuzzy) concepts too—content, meaning, error—
about what they do to us and what we do with them. It is about what hap-
pens when we take these concepts as proper descriptions of what is
happening in the world and with those involved in it and about these
concepts as properly explaining what goes on in the world and with us
while inhabiting it.
This book focuses on education, but our account is not an accusation of
those teachers who use the words, language and concepts we have pointed
out. Teachers, as we all are, are socialized into languages, for languages are
a major path through which we join societies—civic, familial or profes-
sional. Not adopting the language described earlier would not allow teach-
ers to join the rank of educators in modernity. Thus this book is not about
the teachers, but about the complex systems (societies) that have chosen/
allowed these words/language to manage the education of its professionals
and the ways these professionals implement their professions.
The book focuses in particular on the psychologized language that
seems to have come to dominate education/schooling. Psychologization
refers to the long tradition of modern schooling to use psychological
vocabularies and explanatory schemes to analyze schools, families and
individuals’ everyday and institutional lives (De Vos, 2012). Psychologized
language does not always reflect the work of psychology as a discipline for
it is mainly a folkloristic understanding of psychological conceptualiza-
tions. Yet, psychology echoes and at times produces this language and thus
psychologists work, support and contribute to educational policy and
practice, and in this sense they do carry some responsibility. Yet again, we
do realize there are multiple theoretical and empirical approaches in the
wide field of psychology and we would not like the book to be read as a
rejection of the field in its totality; such a stance would not only be naïve
but also blind and uneducated.
6 1 INTRODUCTION

We take words seriously and we know they do not stand alone, but they
are the product of long trajectories, which they shape and within which
their ‘meanings (use)’ are shaped. Partially, we want to uncover the trajec-
tories of these words/languages/concepts in action, as these shape and are
shaped, while focusing on education. To do this, much more knowledge
than the one we master together is needed. Some of what we will do here
has been done before (Dall’Alba & Barnacle, 2007; De Vos, 2015, 2016;
de Vries, Lund, & Baker, 2002), but we sense that much more needs to be
done. We undertake this effort trying to keep an intellectual tradition alive,
one that has little presence in the educational world of schooling. This is
the intellectual tradition that denies that which is not available to the senses
and refuses to bow to the power that produces and reproduces the natu-
ralization of arbitrary and unjustified claims (Bourdieu, 1977).
We critically approach the concepts mentioned for we doubt, as heirs of
the empirical tradition that science, in our case the educational sciences,
can move forward based on fuzzy words for which no empirical basis is to
be found. We are well aware that the taxonomies we use to structure our
world are often the most opaque and indiscernible things to us. At a more
personal level, we doubt that it is ethical to provide explanations based on
things that are not available to public scrutiny but are supposedly only
available to those with the power to make decisions (e.g., ‘Kings’, ‘educa-
tors’, ‘policy makers’), those invested with the power of ‘knowing’ what
really goes on with(in) people (e.g., ‘slaves’, students’). Change cannot
easily be achieved; we just hope we are helping education move in a more
empirically based and thus humane direction.
Reading through the book you might find it to be redundant. We are
aware we repeat some ideas and concepts and there are at least two main
reasons to do this. One is that we believe repetition helps to unravel the
complexity and multiplicity of human thought when it is reiterated at dif-
ferent times and in different places, even if these processes are at all differ-
ent from repeating something in the right place, at the right time, and in
the right way (later we will say more about this). Second, it is through
repetition and/or redundancy (from Latin redundare = surging up) that
the psychologized concepts we try to dismantle came to dominate the edu-
cational sphere, so it is through repetition and redundancy that they will be
dismantled. Therefore, please bear with us and hopefully the redundancies
will build up into a growing, ‘meaningful’ (usable) spiral in the end.
The book is composed of two main sections: the first, a rather ‘light’
section in which we critically review some major constructs in education
 1 INTRODUCTION 7

and their grounding in psychologized discourses (Chaps. 2–11), and a

rather ‘heavier’ second section (Chaps. 12–17) in which we suggest some
possible ways to overcome these psychologized discourses and remedy
their consequences. Chapters 2–11 should be enough to denaturalize the
concepts discussed—for example, the mind, the self, identity, emotion,
emotional intelligence, motivation, culture, language and meaning—and
help the reader reflect on them. It is up to you, the reader, to decide if you
are interested in looking further into the paths suggested in Chaps. 12–17
or if you prefer to look for other possibilities of your own.

* * *

King: What are they talking about?

Slave: Sounds pretty straightforward to me. What is is and what is not is
not!
K: They must be communists, or terrorists, they want us to change
the way we think.
S: Forgive me master, but I do not think that if we keep reading we
will find them amicable to the word ‘think’.
K: Even worse, then, they are nuts!
S: Maybe they are just poor? … by fate or by choice.
K: Academics are not poor … they might not be rich, but they are
not poor.
S: So maybe they are just human.
K: Do you mean to say I’m not?
S: Never.
K: So what do you mean?
S: Well it all depends on what you mean by ‘human’.
K: You are playing tricks.
S: No master, you are above all this, you are godly and golden.
K: I know what’s going in your ‘mind’, now you try to flatter me.
S: That’s not what I meant to do, master. I just said ‘you are above
all this…’
K: Well that is what you meant.
S: If you say that to mean is to say that is fine with me master.
K: We stop the conversation here.
S: You are right. Let’s keep on reading for the time being. We shall
see if it is as insightful as it is entertaining!
8 1 INTRODUCTION

Note
1. It is worth remembering that, as Pirandello would have it, ‘But a fact is like
a sack which won’t stand up when it is empty. In order that it may stand up,
one has to put into it the reason and sentiment which have caused it to exist’
(Pirandello, 1922, p. 15).

References
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Cole, M. (2005). Cross-cultural and historical perspectives on the developmental
consequences of education. Human Development, 48, 195–216.
Dall’Alba, G., & Barnacle, R. (2007). An ontological turn for higher education.
Studies in Higher Education, 32(6), 679–691.
De Vos, J. (2012). Psychologization in times of globalization. London: Routledge.
De Vos, J. (2015). Deneurologizing education? From psychologisation to neu-
rologisation and back. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 34, 279–295.
De Vos, J. (2016). The political brain: The brain as a political invention. In J. De
Vos (Ed.), The metamorphoses of the brain – Neurologisation and its discontents
Dordrecht. The Netherlands: Springer.
Mignolo, W. D., & Tlostanova, M. V. (2006). Theorizing from the borders shift-
ing to geo-and body-politics of knowledge. European Journal of Social Theory,
9(2), 205–221.
Pirandello, L. (1922). Six characters in search of an author (E. Bentley, Trans.).
New York: Norton, 1952, 85.
Villarreal, L., & Witzany, G. (2013). Rethinking quasispecies theory: From fittest
type to cooperative consortia. World Journal of Biological Chemistry, 4(4),
79–90.
de Vries, E., Lund, K., & Baker, M. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dia-
logue: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific
notions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 63–103.
 PART I

Review of Psychologized Discourses

in Education
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The Chippewa obeyed. The dog guarded his master’s burdens, while the freed traveler leaped
forward as if flying. He had no guide.

Everything kept its natural color and shape, except that all things were more bright, more
beautiful than ever before. There were animals near him, but even the little rabbit showed no fear.

One strange thing he noticed from the first. His going was not stopped by trees nor rocks, for
nothing hindered him. He could go through whatever was in his path. They were only the souls or
shadows of trees. He was only a shadow himself in a land of shadows.

Soon he reached a large lake; he saw a green island in the center of it. The white-haired chief
had told him when he left the lodge that he would find this lake, and on its shore he would meet
his lost bride. [154]

He saw no one, but a beautiful canoe of shining white stone was tied to a rock at his feet, and a
shining paddle lay in it. He stepped into the canoe and lifting the paddle turned round. He saw his
bride in another stone canoe at his side.

The two canoes left the shore like two white swans. Great waves came on the lake. The white
stone canoes rode on the top of the waves.

The Great Manitou was good. The Chippewa and his bride reached the Happy Island of Rest.
Here they sat and talked of their happiness. They forgot that they had ever suffered; all things
made them happy.

The Great Manitou talked to the Chippewa chief in a soft wind.

“Go back,” said the voice, “go back to the land of the Chippewas and teach them. The white-
haired chief at the lodge at the gate will tell you many things. You have many winters to see
before you can stay here forever. Your bride will wait for you on the Island of Rest.”

The soft wind grew still. The young chief awoke. His dog was by his side. Great peace was in the
young chief’s heart,—but his journey was only a dream.

He came back to his life and his work. He taught his people many things. He was very brave.
Before he died he told his people his dream, and his tribe gave him a great name, for he had
done much good to his people.

Schoolcraft. [155]

[Contents]
 XXV. THE GREAT BEAR IN THE SKY

(Iroquois)

t seems strange that the Iroquois should have named our Big Dipper
with the other name by which we also know it. They called it the Great
Bear, and pointed it out to the white man in early days.

The Iroquois have this story about the Great Bear in the sky:

Seven braves were chasing a bear, which ran from the woods to a
mountain. This mountain was the home of a stone giant; all but three
hunters were destroyed by the falling stones which he threw.

The three hunters with the bear were lifted up into the sky by the
spirits of the four winds.

The bear can be seen in the sky. He is followed by the first hunter,
who has his bow in his hand. The second hunter comes next with a
kettle. The third hunter is far behind them all, and he is gathering
sticks.

The first hunter shoots at the bear in the Moon of Falling Leaves. The
red maple leaves and the leaves [156]of the oak show the hurt the bear has received. After this
moon the bear hides for a time, but he comes back after a while as brave as ever.

The hunter with the bow never kills him; the hunter with the kettle never cooks his flesh; the
hunter gathering sticks never builds the fire. [157]

[Contents]
 XXVI. THE NORTH STAR

(Ojibway)

hree Ojibway hunters had been out hunting for meat

many days; it was in a new place. The woods were
very thick, but there were no deer in them. The hunters
had nothing to eat; they had no water, for there was
none; they were lost in the thick forest.

The hunters sat down and smoked the pipe of peace.

They offered the smoke to the manitous who might live
in the woods. They asked the manitous to help them.
The day sun was gone and there was no night sun.

The chief covered his head with his blanket and

chanted:

“Our wigwams will see us no more. We will stay here

forever. We can go no further.”

A little pukwudjinnie came out of a hollow tree when

the chief had chanted his story. The Little One was like
a little papoose, but he was very old and knew very much. [158]

He said: “I will help the hunters. I will show you the trail.”

He pulled the thick bushes apart, and the hunters followed. He found the trail and soon came
upon a herd of deer feeding in the bush. The hunters shot two deer and ate much meat; they
were stronger after they had eaten the meat. The Little One did not eat; he was not hungry.

There was no rain, and the hunters had no water; they lost their strength and could not walk on
the trail. The pukwudjinnie left them; then the hunters put their blankets over their heads and sat
down. They said no words. They could not smoke the pipe of peace, for their strength was all
gone.

The Little One came back with a deerskin full of drink for them; he poured it into their mouths; it
was not water; it was like no drink they ever had before. They became very strong and wanted
nothing more to eat or to drink for more than one moon.

He led them on a long trail, to the land of his Little People; he took them to his own chief. The
chief was like a little papoose, but he knew all the trails in the forest. He knew all the trails in the
sky.

The little chief showed the Ojibway chief the star in the north, the star that never moves. The little
chief showed them how to watch this star and not lose [159]their trail. He found their lost trail for
them and sent them home.
The three hunters came back to their own wigwams. They talked in the council and showed their
people the star that never moves.

Other nations and tribes know this star now, but the Ojibways believe that their people were the
first to know where to find it in the Great Blue Wigwam, and that the Little People were told of its
worth when their home was on the Evening Star. [160]

[Contents]
 XXVII. THE STAR THAT NEVER MOVES

(Algonquin)

n one tribe of the Algonquin Indians the story is told that the North Star is the
eye of Keneu, which is their name for eagle. It was also the name of a warrior
of their tribe.

He had won his name by his great feats of bravery; his eyes never grew dim
with sickness nor pain; he had never shown fear. When he was taken prisoner
by his enemies in war, he had, unarmed, run the gauntlet; he had escaped
when all the strong men of his enemies had stood in two lines striking at him
as he ran between the lines.

Keneu had run into the wild forest, which he had never crossed before. He
made himself a war club of metikomeesh. Its seeds are set in wood cups. The
black bear, or Mukwa, feeds on the nuts when they fall. The war club was
strong and heavy.

Keneu crossed the wild forest; he found his own village. He sought out the
wigwam of the girl with whom he had played when they were children.

When Keneu stood at the doorway of her father’s lodge, her father met him
and gave him food. Keneu [161]told his story and all believed him, and he asked for the maiden;
he had thought of her welcome when he should come to his home.

“Memainggwah the butterfly,—where is she?” asked Keneu.

“She walked the Pathway of the Spirits alone one moon before Keneu came,” said her father; and
the mother wailed a mourning cry from the place where she sat.

“Keneu the war eagle will find Memainggwah. His wings are stronger than the wings of the
butterfly. Keneu will go back into the wild forest.”

The warrior, who had so bravely fought his way through bands of men and hidden ways of thick
trees, gave the war cry like an eagle, then bounded back into the wilderness. No one saw him
again as Keneu the warrior.

The father of Memainggwah, when crossing a marsh one night, was followed by a dancing light
as large as half the moon when it is overhead in the sky. The dancing light seemed to call out to
him. He heard it say: “I am Keneu. The Great Spirit has said that I shall find Memainggwah, but
not for many moons. Come to this place and seek for me.”

The father of the maiden went again to the soft marsh land. This time tiny lights flitted all about
him. Singing, humming, whirling, they seemed to fill the air. Wawwawtaissa, little fire-birds, the
Indians call them. [162]
One of the little living fires came and lit upon his arrows. It sang: “Watch for me. I shall go to
Memainggwah soon. The eye of Keneu the war eagle will shine through the blue of the Great
Lodge. You will see Keneu near Mukwa in the sky.”

When three moons had gone the father saw a new light in the sky. It was where Keneu had said.
He took his great peace pipe and offered smoke to the new star. The star never changed its
place. It shone like the eye of a war eagle.

There it has been through hundreds of moons. It is the eye of Keneu. He is happy, for he has
found Memainggwah. She waited for him halfway on the Bridge of Souls, made by the stars
which are a white pathway to the Happy Hunting Grounds.

White men call this star near Mukwa the Great Bear, the North Star. It never stirs from its place in
the north. This star helps lost men to find their way back to the trail. An Indian in his canoe at
night can watch this star and know which way to go.

Keneu knew what it was to seek the lost. While the North Star shines there is hope for those who
wander in the forest or on the wide lakes. [163]
 Indian Women with Papooses

From a Photograph

[164]

[Contents]
 XXVIII. TRAPPING IN THE HAPPY HUNTING GROUNDS

(Wyandot)

little papoose was found alone in the woods

by a squaw. A blind bear had killed the child’s
father, and a huge rabbit had carried off his
mother.

The little papoose was taken to the home of

his mother’s sister. She named him
Tchakobeech. He never grew larger than a
papoose, but he was as wise as an old chief.
After many moons he made snares or traps
and caught the blind bear and the big rabbit,
but he never saw his mother again.

Tchakobeech said: “I will go to the Happy

Hunting Grounds and find my father and my
mother. I will climb to the sky and break it
open.”

Tchakobeech left the wigwam one morning

and climbed to the top of the tallest pine tree on the highest hill that he could find. No one saw
him. Each time he was near the top of the pine he blew his breath on the tree, and it grew twice
as tall as it was [165]at first. He did this many times, and at last he touched the blue sky. He put his
head through this blue wigwam and stepped from the tree into the Happy Hunting Grounds.

Tchakobeech liked this new country very much, but he could not see any people. He was
lonesome, so he went back down the tree to the ground. He had left a sister in his aunt’s wigwam.
She was always ready to run races and to play with him. He told his sister of the beautiful place
behind the sky, and she was ready to go back with him.

The tree did not fall, and Tchakobeech made his sister climb up first, for then he could help her if
her foot slipped. He had made little wigwams on the big branches when he came down, and they
slept in these when the dark came.

They had four sleeps before the sky was reached. Tchakobeech made another hole in the sky,
and after his sister had gone through it he broke off the top of the tree and went through it himself.
Nobody could follow them, for now the tree was too short.

The two were very happy together and played all day in the green fields. Tchakobeech made two
wigwams and picked many flowers for their resting places. He set his traps to see if he could
catch any animals. His sister told him there was nothing to catch in such a beautiful country. [166]
Tchakobeech heard a noise in the middle of the night and went to his traps to see what was the
matter. They were all on fire, but did not seem to burn. He called to his sister to come and help
him.

The little trapper said: “Sister, tell me what I shall do. I have caught a great fire in my traps.”

The girl trembled like a leaf on a tree. She said: “I know what is the matter. You have caught the
sun. Let him go. He could not see in the dark, and his feet are caught. He cannot get away.”

The little papoose man could see that she told the truth. He was so small that the sun burned his
hands and made him blind when he tried to let it out. Tchakobeech said: “I have made trouble for
all the tribes on the ground. I am not wise any more.”

Just then a little mouse jumped out of a stump. It had been with its brothers to eat the moon. The
papoose caught the mouse and breathed on it until it grew as big as a bear. Its teeth were very
long. He drove it up to the traps, and it bit the leather strings.

The sun jumped out of the snares and went away.

He had been gone a whole day. All the tribes remember when the sun did not shine, and there
was no morning between two sleeps. It was many moons ago. Tchakobeech did not put his
snares in that place two times. The sun found another place to sleep and was never caught
again.

Schoolcraft. [167]

[Contents]
 XXIX. THE OLD MAN IN THE SKY

(Iroquois)

he people of the Six Nations, or Iroquois, point

out to their children a cluster of stars which they
call the Old Man. White men do not always
know where it is. They tell this story of his
reaching the sky, or the Great Blue Wigwam.

An old chief was tired of life and of his people.

He took his bundle and walking-stick and went
to the top of the highest bluff. There he sang his
death chant. His people followed, but waited at
the foot of the bluff. While they were watching
they saw him slowly rise in the air; his voice
sounded fainter and fainter; the spirits of the
four winds raised him to the Great Star Lodge.
He was given a place among the stars.

His stooping form, his staff, and bundle are

pointed out to Indian children as they watch the
stars at night. [168]

[Contents]
 XXX. WHERE THE MORNING STAR CAME FROM

(Chippewa)

A manitou lived with his family near the Big Sea Water. There were two children in this family of
the good manitou. The children of good manitous help the Indians. They do much good, like their
fathers and their mothers.

This brother and sister were told that their work would soon begin. They were to be separated.
The sister was called to go to the Place of Breaking Light. The brother knew his work was to be a
watcher among the rocks and hills. He was to be a Little One of the Woods.

The day of parting came. The sister sat with the brother and watched the sun go down in the Big
Sea Water. She put her hand into her brother’s hand. [169]

The sister said: “Watch for me, my brother; watch for me in the morning. Turn your face to the
Place of the Breaking Light when you waken from your sleep in the morning; watch for your sister.
It is our father who said I must go.

“Watch where the Great Blue Lodge is painted with the paints we now see across the Big Sea
Water. I shall be in the Great Blue Lodge in the Place of Breaking Light. My dress will be painted
with paints. I will shine like a drop of the shining Big Sea Water. Your sister will see. Your sister
will watch for you. She will not forget you.”

The brother said: “I will sit on this rock in the morning. I will look toward the Place of Breaking
Light. I will watch for my sister that is gone. I will see her. My father has said it.”

The Place of Breaking Light was very bright the next morning. The red was never so red before.
All the Place of Breaking Light was bright like a burning forest. The sun was not there.

The brother saw a new star. It smiled on him like the face of his sister; he knew her; his sister was
the Morning Star in the Place of Breaking Light.

“I have found my sister; she is not lost. She is in the Great Blue Lodge; the spirits of the four
winds have carried my sister. She is well.”

The brother turned to go back to the wigwam of his [170]father, the good manitou. His feet would
not carry him there. He sat down in a cave in the rock. He saw himself in the water; he was one of
the Little People. He was glad, for he had now many brothers. They called to him in the cave; he
answered them; they were happy together.

The father and mother often saw their children. The Morning Star is happy in her Star Lodge. The
brother is happy among the trees and the rocks. [171]
[Contents]
 XXXI. THE WOMAN IN THE MOON

(Algonquin)

n old medicine woman lived with one tribe of

the Algonquins. She knew all the plants that
gave medicine; she could tell of things that
would happen to her tribe or her family
many moons before the things came to
pass; but she did not know one thing. She
did not know when this world would come to
an end. She was forever asking the Great
Spirit to tell her.

A manitou was sent to her to make her stop

asking. She said she would stop when her
headband, which she was weaving, was
done.

The manitou said she must hide herself from

her people or he could not answer her
question. The question would be answered
when the forehead strap was finished. She
hid herself in the moon. There she sits
weaving the headstrap.

Once a month she stirs a great kettle of boiled corn that stands before her; while her two hands
have hold [172]of the stick, the cat which is always near her unravels her headstrap. She begins
over again when the corn is stirred.

There you can see her every night when the moon is full. She has never stopped asking, the
manitou has never answered, and her weaving has never been finished. [173]
 Pueblo Indian Pottery

From a Photograph

[174]

[Contents]
 XXXII. THE SEVEN STARS OF PLEIADES

(Iroquois)

even little Iroquois boys were in the habit of

carrying their dishes of succotash to the top
of a little hill near their wigwams. They
would sit on this little hill and eat their
supper. When the succotash was all gone,
then the best singer would sing while the
other six would dance around the mound.
Every night they would do this. No other
boys came with them.

One night they planned to have a feast of

soup. Each boy was to bring a piece of
meat. They would cook it on the hill and
then fill their clay bowls with the soup.

Their parents would not give them the meat.

The boys had eaten nothing all day, but
they took their empty bowls and had a mock
feast. They piled their dry bowls after this
empty feast and danced around the mound.

Their heads and their hearts were very light. They forgot their hunger. They danced faster than
ever [175]before; their feet left the ground and they were dancing in the air. The six boys were
around their leader who was singing.

Up, up, went the boys into the sky. Their parents saw them and called to them to come back.
They could not do it. Whirling, floating, dancing, they took their places in the sky, where every one
may see them.

The leader stopped his singing and tried to return. As he was not content in the Great Star
Wigwam, his light is not so bright as that of the six other stars. [176]

[Contents]
 XXXIII. THE CHIPMUNK’S BLACK STRIPES

(Iroquois)

he porcupine was chosen head chief of the

animals because nothing could hurt him. This
was when animals had tribes and chiefs like
the Indians.

Soon after the porcupine was made head

chief he called a great council. When the
animals were all seated in a ring around the
council fire, he asked them this question:
“Shall we have night all the time or daylight?”

Then the animals were divided. There was

much talking. Some wanted it to be night
always. Some said it was best to have it
always day. The bear wanted it always dark.
He had a big voice and kept chanting: “Always
night. Always night.”

Each animal said something. The little

chipmunk had a loud voice and kept singing:
“Light will come. Light will come.” He has a loud voice yet.

The council was held in the night. The animals could not decide what was best, but the chipmunk
kept [177]saying: “Light will come. Light will come”; and before any one knew it the sun began to
rise.

The night animals, with the bear for a leader, were very angry. The chipmunk saw the day was
coming and began to run. The bear said it was because he was afraid and ran after him.

The great bear was clumsy. The little chipmunk was quick, but the bear nearly caught him as the
chipmunk ran into a hole in a hollow tree. The bear struck him, and the black stripes down the
chipmunk’s back show where the bear hit him.

The chipmunk and his tribe won, and night and day have come ever since that council. [178]
 Dance of the Moki Antelope Priests

From a Photograph

[179]

[Contents]
 XXXIV. THE ECHO GOD AND THE NORTHERN LIGHTS

(Iroquois)

The Iroquois seem to have been the only nation to worship with feast and dance the echo god of
the hills. When at war with other Indian nations or tribes, the chiefs and warriors of the Iroquois
would go out and call: “Gohweh! Gohweh!” meaning, “I am telling you!” as many times as there
were enemies slain.

They did this very boldly, for they never believed that strange nations could hear or understand
them or the echo’s answer. If any of their own people were slain, the cry was, “Ohweh!” which
meant, “Our own!”

When they were on the warpath and night overtook them, the scattered ones were gathered in by
using the call to the echo god.

While planning an attack upon some other band runners were sent out ahead to call to the echo
god and find out if it was his wish for them to fight. If no answer came to repeated calls, the attack
would be [180]given up for a time. Some form of worship, either feast or dance, would then be
held, and runners would after this be sent out again to ask what the echo god meant by not
answering. If by any means an answer came to their wails and calls, then the attack would be
made. If no answer came, the band found some other tribe to destroy.

A dance was always given to the echo god after a victory, and with this was given a great feast,
but never until they had mourned for their dead and decided what to do with their captives.

The Iroquois go on the warpath no more. They have no longer any need to call upon their echo
god for help. They no longer offer him the worship of the feast and dance.

The Northern Lights were closely watched by the Iroquois. The color of the lights meant a great
deal to the Indian watchers.

If the Northern Lights were white, it was believed that the frost would shortly follow; if yellow,
sickness and much trouble to the nation was feared; while if the lights were red, very red, war and
bloodshed were on their way to harm the innocent.

If the sky was mottled and it was springtime, that was the best sign possible. There was dancing
and singing, for a good corn season was expected in return for the worship shown in the dance.

Adapted from Powell’s Report. [181]

[Contents]
 XXXV. LEGEND OF MACKINAW ISLAND

(Chippewa)

he spirit that rules the Woman’s Star sent her

son Osseo to the earth one day.

There is a little star that shines every evening

near the Woman’s Star. It is jealous of the
Evening Star, and it sent poison-arrows of
starlight on the head of Osseo. When the
poison light-arrow struck Osseo he became like
an Indian who had seen a hundred winters.

Nothing old or evil can live on the Woman’s

Star. Osseo could not return to his mother. He
was brave. He made no mourning. He made
many friends among the Ojibways.

Oweenee was the daughter of a chief. She was

like the red lily that grows on the prairies. She
had nine sisters. They were like a field of lilies.
Her sisters had each married a great warrior.

Oweenee loved the old and wrinkled Osseo. There was none to cook the deer meat his trembling
feet [182]brought to his wigwam. She was very sorry for Osseo. Her sisters mocked at her pity for
him. Osseo heard them one day. He took courage and asked her to help him bear his sorrows.
She became his wife, for she knew his heart was as kind as it was brave.

The chief of the Ojibways made a great feast. The sacred dance was to be danced by all the
young braves. Oweenee’s sisters mocked at her again. This is what they said:

“See Oweenee. She is like the young vine that clings to the pine that is black with burning. Osseo
is like the pine that the lightning has torn and burned. Oweenee would make him like a young
pine. She is blind.

“Osseo, go from us. Leave Oweenee. She is not for you.”

Osseo heard the sisters. His heart was very angry. His eyes looked like the eyes of the wolverine.
He looked at Oweenee and then into the sky. He gave a strange war cry and shouted: “Sho-wain-
ne-me-shing-nosa!”

This means, “Pity me, my father.”

“Poor old man! he is calling to his father. If he goes back, Oweenee will be the wife of a warrior,”
said the sisters.
Osseo crept into a hollow log to hide himself.

As quick as a bird can fly he came out of the farther [183]end of the hollow log, but he was no
longer an old man. He was a young brave, finer than any in the Ojibway nation.

He went to Oweenee. When he put his hand upon her she became old like the oldest squaw. Her
beauty went like the lily that withers in one day. Her sisters had no words. They sat on the ground
and covered their heads with their blankets. They said, “We have no Oweenee.”

Osseo called her his Nenemoshee, his sweetheart. He fed her at the feast. He danced the sacred
dance. His eyes were always toward Oweenee.

The feast was held in a great lodge. Music came into the lodge while they were all eating. Osseo
understood the music. It was his mother talking to him.

“Come back to me. There is a place ready for you. Your bowls of clay shall be of copper. Your
kettles of stone shall be wampum. Come.”

While they were eating the lodge was lifted into the sky. All the tribe who were eating were
changed into birds. Oweenee’s sisters became crows. Their husbands became blue jays. Others
were changed to quails and wild geese. All but Osseo and Oweenee were birds.

Osseo looked at Oweenee as they sailed through the air in the shining wigwam. She was still an
old squaw. He prayed again to his father. Oweenee became like [184]the lily again just as the
lodge rested on the Evening Star. Here everything was peace. All things were happy, and none
did harm to another.

One day the son of Osseo was learning to use his bow and arrow. He shot one of the singing
birds and a drop of blood fell on the star. The bird changed into a woman. The child fell from the
star, and the woman and all the birds followed it, down, down to the same island they had left.
The shining lodge of Osseo and Oweenee followed them and was fastened on a high hill far out
in the big lake.

The land was very small there, and as the birds became men and women again, the place was
very crowded. Each one became smaller and smaller until they were the smallest people in the
world. They became pukwudjinnies.

Schoolcraft. [185]

[Contents]