[Xmca-l] Re: Resending LSV/ANL on crisis in ontogengy

[Andy Blunden]

I think that cultural forms of child-rearing and the corresponding 
expectations placed upon the child have been developed by communities 
over centuries and part of that process is the collective experience of 
the relevant practices. Doubtless all sorts of crazy practices have been 
tried out at different times, but if the children do not respond as 
expected, the idea is dropped or modified. I think this is the point at 
which the biological limitations and predispositions of children comes 
in. But the present-day child is presented with a finished, working system.
I seem to recall that Barbara Rogoff has written about this.
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/


mike cole wrote:
> I find it a little odd to think that SSD has little to do with biological
> maturation.
> So few 6 month olds get married these days.
>
> However, the "structuring of forms the child does not yet 'have' " is
> certainly central
> to the sociocultural organization of human development. Among other things,
> mismatches
> in timing between adult normative expectations and child behaviors
> associated with, say,
> the maturation of bowel control or the ability to sit quietly at a desk for
> several hours at a time
> might just give rise to the kinds of phenomena that lSV refers to as
> crises.
>
> I am not sure. What are the criteria for a crisis? Are they generally
> agreed upon and to be found
> in practice-guiding texts for, say, professional pediatricians?
>
> It seems that the attached may be relevant to several of the remarks in
> this thread.
>
> Uncertain-in-so-cal
> mike
>
> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2013_01.dir/pdf5I3He7qyRQ.pdf
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>   
>> I think I agree with that (that SSD has little to do with biological
>> maturation).
>>
>> This is actually, to my reading, a subtle yet very appropriate passage that
>> Peg has unearthed or recollected.
>>
>> These things that the child really does need, wherein the child conveys "I
>> cannot get on without this", is a reference to materials that enable the
>> structuring of forms that the child does not yet have, i.e. they are
>> necessary (but perhaps insufficient on their own) means to their
>> development of neo-formations, or, indeed, transformations in their way of
>> knowing.
>>
>> The sense I get is that this imperative is not derived from a need to
>> comply with bureaucratic processes (e.g. black shoes must be worn at
>> school), but with a recognition that something objective and fundamental
>> cannot be achieved without it.
>>
>> Huw
>>
>>
>> On 22 March 2015 at 00:38, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> p. 365, "The Child's Psyche":
>>>
>>> "A child may or may not be bought a toy, but it is impossible not to buy
>>> it a textbook or an exercise book. The child therefore requests a
>>> schoolbook to be bought for it quite differently to how it asks for a toy
>>> to be bought. These requests have a different sense not only for its
>>> parents but above all for the child itself."
>>>
>>> I was thinking, in relation to Huw's issues, that really SSD is little to
>>> do with "biological maturation." It is to do with the normative series of
>>> roles, and these are found in bureaucracies as well as the modern life
>>>       
>> of a
>>     
>>> child.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>>>
>>>
>>> Peg Griffin wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Thinking of growth which challenges social arrangements, Andy, am I
>>>> mistakenly remembering an anecdote like the following in Leontiev's
>>>> "Problems in the Development of Mind:"  A child not yet going to school
>>>>         
>> and
>>     
>>>> a child going to school have different "calls" on the family to buy
>>>>         
>> pencils
>>     
>>>> or crayons -- might be nice for the younger one but absolute need for
>>>>         
>> the
>>     
>>>> older one.   I hope this scenario is really there (or somewhere not
>>>>         
>> just in
>>     
>>>> my internal constructions] because in it socio-cultural institutions
>>>>         
>> impact
>>     
>>>> one another and pull in the individual's growth while doing it and then
>>>> there's a wonderful arabesque rebound to the individual.
>>>> [Sorry I don't right now have a copy and a way to get to where this
>>>>         
>> might
>>     
>>>> be in the Leontiev book.  Hint:) I'm really pretty sure it's far away
>>>>         
>> from
>>     
>>>> the part about trying to teach forearm cells to recognize light! ] Peg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>
>>>       
>
>
>
>