[Xmca-l] Re: Chomsky, Vygotsky, and phenomenology

[Glassman, Michael]

I think Engestrom makes a strong rejoinder to Bereiter that the learning paradox relies to a certain extent the development of complexities inside the individual head - but perhaps there is no reason to have to make this argument.  I am getting this right (not sure because I concentrated on his section on Mead - well because my thinking of the subject stops in 1933 or thereabouts).  That increased complexity occurs through symbol enabled collaboration (I tend to take a more Deweyan read of Mead, seeing symbols more as secondary vehicles than primary motivators for collaboration).  The Pragmatists would say there's no reason to go inside the head, and obviously when we collaborate using symbols who can create new, more complex ways of thinking about things.  One thing I realized reading some of the chapter was that Chomsky never took on Mead or Dewey.  Perhaps it was because they were not considered part of the cognitive revolution - or perhaps because his arguments break down - as they might with a more Pragmatic reading of Vygotsky.

Michael
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces+mglassman=ehe.ohio-state.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu [xmca-l-bounces+mglassman=ehe.ohio-state.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu] on behalf of Vera John-Steiner [vygotsky@unm.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 12:53 PM
To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Chomsky, Vygotsky, and phenomenology

While Chomsky is indeed very influential his approach to language and its
acquisition is opposite to that of Vygotsky. He focuses on syntax while
Vygotsky focuses on semantics.
He proposes an innate language acquisition device while Vygotsky approaches
language developmentally. (I am repeating some of Carol's points.) He is a
Cartesian,while Vygotsky
Opposed mind/body dualism. And the list goes on.
I don't think he can be integrated into CHAT.
Vera
-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
[mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Carol Macdonald
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 7:37 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Chomsky, Vygotsky, and phenomenology

Do you think Chomsky knows he is? Howard Gardner is a very generous fellow.

On 17 December 2014 at 16:28, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
wrote:
>
> oh, I just read your second paragraph...
>
> Howard Gardner lists Noam Chomsky as one of the "founders of cognitive
> science," along with Jerome Bruner, John McCarthy, George Miller, and
> Allen Newell (1985, p. 23).
>
> Gardner, H. (1985). The mind's new science: A history of the cognitive
> revolution. New York: Basic Books.
>
> Martin
>
> On Dec 17, 2014, at 8:54 AM, Carol Macdonald <carolmacdon@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Well yes, and as linguistic and psychology student I was very proud
> > of
> him
> > for his review, it made me laugh and laugh.  But Chomsky never read
> Piaget
> > or Vygotsky.  He would have been interested in Vygotsky's
> > interpretation
> of
> > Behaviousrism.
> >
> > As to cognitive psychology - well I suppose we should be pleased,
> > but Chomsky had no direct hand in that.
> >
> > Carol.
> >
> > On 17 December 2014 at 14:49, Martin John Packer <
> mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Chomsky knew enough about psychology to write a devastating review of
B.
> >> F. Skinner's book 'Verbal behavior,' which still makes very
> >> interesting reading. And Chomsky's own book 'Syntactic Structures'
> >> was one of the
> key
> >> components in the emergence of cognitive psychology in the late
> >> 1950s,
> as
> >> Howard Gardner's book makes clear.
> >>
> >> Martin
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Carol A  Macdonald Ph D (Edin)
> > Developmental psycholinguist
> > Academic, Researcher,  and Editor
> > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa
>
>
>

--
Carol A  Macdonald Ph D (Edin)
Developmental psycholinguist
Academic, Researcher,  and Editor
Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa