[Xmca-l] Re: A question on Vygotsky and Imagination

[mike cole]

Those papers look much more relevant to Shannon's interests, Danilo.
mike


On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 7:14 AM, <dansgui@gmail.com> wrote:

>  Dear Shannon,
>
> I’m also trying to develop some ideas on imagination in
> affective-cognitive processes articulated with antropological and
> sociopolitical issues. To these works (see attached), Vygotski was na
> importante reference. Maybe it can be of any contribution.
>
> Best wishes,
> Danilo
>
>
>
>
> *De:* mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
> *Enviado:* ‎sexta-feira‎, ‎23‎ de ‎maio‎ de ‎2014 ‎17‎:‎28
> *Para:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>
> Hi Shannon- I am really uncertain about how to contribute to the discourse
> of political science but perhaps its through the notion of global
> discourse.
>
> In my prior note on the Dialogue of Cultures school, I said that it
> demanded, in addition to a pretty well off segment of any existing state, a
> really global set of polylogues to avoid the problems of the binary
> involved in the notion of dia - logue. I had not connected this with the
> question of imagination.
>
> >From recent discussion with Russian colleagues, it seems that the entire
> line of work that descends from Zaporozhets, which includes Zinchenko and
> Bodrova (in the US), Kudravstev (in Russia) focuses on the Kantian notion
> of productive imagination. They analyze this notion in terms of early
> developmental processes. An article by Repina in *The psychology of
> Preschool Children* edited by Zaporozhets and Elkonin provides some notion
> of the early theorizing. Articles by Zaporozhets in the *Journal of
> Russian and East European Psychology* might be helpful. Vladimir Kudravstev
>
> is currently continuing this line of work.
>
> The work of the playworlds consortium, published in MCA
>
> http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10749030903342246?journalCode=hmca20#previewis
> perhaps relevant.
>
> Finally, I attach a paper that discusses imagination from what we take to
> be a Vygotskian perspective or at least an inspiration.
>
> Hard to imagine that imagination is everywhere one looks.... but such is
> the nature of human thought! :-)
>
> mike
>
>
> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Greg Thompson
> <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Shannon,
> > This looks like a wonderfully interesting project!
> > As for thoughts here, I wonder what others on the list think, but with
> > regard to your third limitation of Vygotsky's idea of imagination and
> > whether or not it is intersubjective, I wonder if that is accurate.
> > Generally speaking, I think of Vygotsky's main points as being that
> > thinking is fundamentally intersubjective so it is difficult for me to
> > imagine (!) how imagination could be otherwise. Perhaps you have some
> > specific writings where you see this? Or perhaps we mean something
> > different by these terms?
> > I'm sure you're already familiar with them, but some other classics to
> > consider are Bakhtin's Dialogic Imagination and Volosinov's Marxism and
> the
> > Philosophy of Language are two other very good places to look for
> > developing a Vygotsky-like approach to imagination. When put together
> with
> > Vygotsky, I think they make for a powerful trio for understanding
> > imagination in politics!
> > Hope to hear more.
> > -greg
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:02 PM, Shannon Brincat <
> > shannonbrincat@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I am new to this list ­ so thanks for your time.
> > >
> > > Presently, I am trying to write up an article on Vygotsky and
> > imagination.
> > > Essentially, my interest is to draw attention to a different way of
> > looking
> > > at, and deploying imagination in politics, and one that emphases its
> > > creative potential. In my field, International Relations (IR)
> imagination
> > > is
> > > just ignored as something fanciful rather than intrinsic to human
> > > cognition.
> > >
> > > I have pasted the abstract below. Any advice on secondary literature,
> or
> > > even key aspects of Vygotsky’s work that you deem relevant, would be
> > great.
> > >
> > > Once again, thanks!
> > >
> > > Shannon
> > >
> > >
> > > This article seeks to demonstrate the political significance of
> > > imagination and to reclaim this cognitive faculty as something
> intrinsic
> > > to political life ins world politics. We focus on the psychological
> work
> > of
> > > Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky (1896-1934) who, we argue, offers a
> > > reconceptualisation of the faculty of imagination as a key part of
> human
> > > cognitive development and as something central to creative activity.
> > After
> > > engaging with the limitations in Kant’s productive imagination,
> Husserl’s
> > > phenomenological imagination, and Freud’s irrational understanding of
> > > imagination, we emphasise three elements of Vygotsky’s analysis that
> > > demonstrate the significance of imagination to politics that are
> > routinely
> > > denied in mainstream approaches to International Relations (IR). These
> > > include how the faculty of imagination is developmental,
> interpenetrated
> > > with reality, and dependent on social-history and culture. While we
> > contend
> > > that Vygotsky offers significant advances in how we can conceive and
> > > approach the faculty of imagination in political thought, in the
> closing
> > > section we identify three weaknesses. Firstly, while Vygotsky offers a
> > link
> > > between imagination and practice, and was concerned with progressive
> > social
> > > development, it offers only a weakly developed account of imagination¹s
> > > link
> > > to political praxis. Secondly, Vygotsky¹s account tells Us only of the
> > > positively productive elements of imagination but he did not turn his
> > > attention to the 똡arkside of imagination regarding the politics of
> fear,
> > > 똮thering, and hate. Thirdly, Vygotsky provides only a thin account of
> the
> > > intersubjective processes of imagination and offers only the beginnings
> > of
> > > a
> > > theory that could embed imagination within social-relations. We close
> by
> > > advancing a heuristic of imagination that can help us better understand
> > > this
> > > complex faculty of imagination and its relation to politics.
> > >
> > > Dr. Shannon K. Brincat
> > > Griffith University Research Fellow
> > > Room -1.09 | Building N72 | Centre for Governance and Public Policy |
> > > School
> > > of Government and International Relations
> > > Nathan Campus | Griffith University | 170 Kessels Road | Nathan |
> > Brisbane
> > > |
> > > Queensland | 4111 | Australia
> > >
> > > Global Discourse, Co-Editor
> > > http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rgld20#.Ua53eCsd7pM
> > >
> > > New edited series available through Praeger
> > > Communism in the 21st Century (3 Vols.)
> > > http://www.abc-clio.com/product.aspx?isbn=9781440801259
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > Assistant Professor
> > Department of Anthropology
> > 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > Brigham Young University
> > Provo, UT 84602
> > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> >
>