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

Sun Dec 21 10:42:24 PST 2014

Aria,

Thanks for something more specific. It helps.

Would you mind clarifying, when you say:

> He sees his goal and Vygotsky's goal of arguing for creativity to be the same although in two different contexts.

What are the two different contexts?

Annalisa

________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Aria Razfar <arazfar@uic.edu>
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2014 8:43 AM
To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: Re: Chomsky, Vygotsky, and phenomenology

Greg,

The topic that seemed to interest him most about Vygotsky was "inner speech" and its connection to culture, social activities and even history. The representation of Chomsky's "nativist" position in sociocultural literature seems to be decontextualized, acultural, and ahistorical, and to some degree rightfully so. Although he would include culture, social activity, and even history as part of "stable cognitive elements" and are definitely "more than habits" which was the main goal of his writings in the 50s and 60s.  He sees his goal and Vygotsky's goal of arguing for creativity to be the same although in two different contexts. It was clear to me that he doesn't see the controversies, at least not the same way post "social turn" scholars and self-proclaimed Chomskians have framed it. He sees his views of language and cognition as very much compatible with Vygotsky's insights, especially the ones he's read closely. It's been years since he's written about these topics, so unfortunately there isn't a paper. His take on the roots of the "controversies" and the subsequent careers built on it are "quite interesting." Did you have any specific questions?

Aria

Aria Razfar, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Literacy, Language, and Culture
Director of Graduate Studies, Curriculum and Instruction
University of Illinois at Chicago
1040 W. Harrison St. M/C 147
Chicago, IL, 60607

Director of English Learning through Mathematics, Science and Action Research (ELMSA)
www.elmsa.org

Webpage: http://education.uic.edu/personnel/faculty/aria-razfar-phd
Tel: 312-413-8373
Fax: 312-996-8134

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 10:54 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: Re: Chomsky, Vygotsky, and phenomenology

Aria,
Any updates to report on Professor Chomsky's take on Vygotsky?
-greg

On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Aria Razfar <arazfar@uic.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Martin,
>
> See below. He finds Vygotsky's work "quite interesting." Let's see if
> he elaborates. I find his persepctive on the "Linguistic Wars" also
> interesting.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistics_Wars
>
> Aria
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noam Chomsky [mailto:chomsky@mit.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 6:09 PM
> To: Aria Razfar
> Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Chomsky, Vygotsky, and phenomenology
>
> The "linguistic wars" are largely an invention of overheated
> imaginations of those who thought they were fighting them.  If you
> check the record you'll discover that I barely participated, and
> didn't consider them any different from interchanges within what's
> claimed to be "my side" of the non-existent wars.
>
> Vygotsky did quite interesting work.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aria Razfar [mailto:arazfar@uic.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 6:28 PM
> To: Noam Chomsky
> Cc: arazfar@uic.edu
> Subject: FW: [Xmca-l] Re: Chomsky, Vygotsky, and phenomenology
>
> See question below re: "opinion on Vygotsky"?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Martin John
> Packer
> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 5:12 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Chomsky, Vygotsky, and phenomenology
>
> Since we have Professor Chomsky online, might we be able to ask him
> his opinion of Vygotsky?
>
> Martin
>
> On Dec 17, 2014, at 4:59 PM, Aria Razfar <arazfar@uic.edu> wrote:
>
> > Hi Martin,
> >
> > Metaphor was my take and other cognitive linguist's take (i.e.
> > Lakoff). I believe his rejection of "Metaphor" at least in the
> > embodied cognition sense is rooted in the "Linguistics Wars."
> > Several people in this thread as well others in the field of
> > cognitive linguistics made the claim that he was and remains a
> > Cartesian dualist. He definitely does not consider himself as such.
> > In order to establish the field of linguistics, he had to position
> > it within the broader arch of western enlightenment and romanticism.
> > Hence, the title of
> the book.
> >
> > Aria
> >
> > Aria Razfar, Ph.D.
> > Associate Professor of Literacy, Language, and Culture Director of
> > Graduate Studies, Curriculum and Instruction University of Illinois
> > at Chicago
> > 1040 W. Harrison St. M/C 147
> > Chicago, IL, 60607
> >
> > Director of English Learning through Mathematics, Science and Action
> > Research (ELMSA) www.elmsa.org
> >
> > Webpage: http://education.uic.edu/personnel/faculty/aria-razfar-phd
> > Tel: 312-413-8373
> > Fax: 312-996-8134
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Martin John
> > Packer
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 3:47 PM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: FW: Re: Chomsky, Vygotsky, and phenomenology
> >
> > Hi Aria,
> >
> > It would help to see the message that Noam is responding to! I don't
> > see, for example, how metaphor crept into this discussion.
> > (Actually, looking back through the thread, I see that this was your
> > proposal.)
> >
> > I suppose a lot depends on what one means by being "a Cartesian." As
> > I just wrote in another message, Chomsky was, I think, positioning
> > his approach to linguistics in a tradition in which Descartes was
> > prominent: in which one tries to figure out what makes possible a
> > specific characteristic or ability of the mind. Chomsky asked what
> > universal competence would be necessary to make language possible -
> > any
> language.
> >
> > I'm not trying to attach a label to the man; but he give the book
> > its title for a reason, and a very respectable one.
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On Dec 17, 2014, at 4:34 PM, Aria Razfar <arazfar@uic.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Here is Chomsky's response to whether or not he is a Cartesian. Not
> > surprisingly, he categorically rejects the idea of "metaphor" as well.
> > At least he's open to change. Now whether our subject is dead or
> > alive that is a different question.
> >>
> >> Aria
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Noam Chomsky [mailto:chomsky@mit.edu]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 3:16 PM
> >> To: Aria Razfar
> >> Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Chomsky, Vygotsky, and phenomenology
> >>
The reason for the phrase "Cartesian linguistics" was explained very clearly in the opening pages of the book.  No one who read at least that far could believe that I am "a Cartesian," let alone anyone who read farther.  I can't account for the illiteracy of "notable folks."
> >>
 It's also not a metaphor.  Rather, exactly as I described it, which I would repeat verbatim today.
> >>
There's no need to argue against "mind-body dualism." As I've discussed repeatedly, Newton's discoveries terminated the thesis, at least in its classical form, through Descartes and beyond.
> >>
Of course I've changed my views since the '50s and '60s, in fact in the past few months.  That's normal in subjects that are not dead.
> >>
> >> Noam Chomsky