[Xmca-l] Re: In defense of Vygotsky [[The fallacy of word-meaning]

[Andy Blunden]

No, the point is that for ANL "meaning" refers to the one true meaning 
of something. He does not allow that the meaning of something may be 
contested, and that a meaning may be contested because of heterogeneity 
in society, different social classes, genders, ethnic groups, social 
movements and so on. For ANL there is only the one true meaning of 
something which "everyone knows" or individual, personal meanings, which 
are therefore taken to be subjective.

Andy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/


Annalisa Aguilar wrote:
> This continues and extends from my original post concerning Andy's 
> breakdown of ANL vs. LSV. There are about 8 points total... [copypasta 
> is a starch of art] 
> --------------------------------------------------- 6. [The fallacy of 
> word-meaning] (see original post below) 
> --------------------------------------------------- You say: "ANL 
> believes that motivation determines perception. The norm of 
>  perception, the "true" meaning of an object, is therefore the meaning 
>  it has for the community as a whole. I am questioning the validity of 
> this concept of "community as a whole" in this context." So is it the 
> case that word-meaning is denied by ANL because meaning and symbols 
> "must be" cohesive across the culture and cannot have personal or 
> spontaneous meaning? I can see the reason politically to emphasize 
> this, if the State is sanctioned as the sole arbiter of meaning. --- 
> clip from previous post below Wed, 22 Oct 2014 06:28:48 +0000 Annalisa 
> wrote:
>> _6th charge_: The fallacy of word-meaning ---------- ANL believes 
>> that the mental representation in a child's awareness must 
>> _correspond_ directly to the object in reality, and not just 
>> perceptually, but also how the object may relate and associate to 
>> other objects and their meanings. The example is a table. Because of 
>> this definition of, what I will call here for convenience (i.e., my 
>> laziness) "object-awareness", ANL takes exception with LSV's 
>> rendering of a _single word_ to stand as a generalization to 
>> reference the meaning of the word and as an independent unit 
>> (word-meaning). Furthermore, ANL disagrees with the existence of 
>> these word-meanings, _as units_, but he also disagrees that they are 
>> what construct consciousness as a whole. ANL can say this because he 
>> considers consciousness and intellect to be synonymous. ---------- 
>>> Andy's reply to #6 above: ANL believes that motivation determines 
>>> perception. The norm of perception, the "true" meaning of an object, 
>>> is therefore the meaning it has for the community as a whole. I am 
>>> questioning the validity of this concept of "community as a whole" 
>>> in this context. >--end 
>
>